Selected quad for the lemma: authority_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
authority_n	apostle_n	peter_n	successor_n	2,335	5	9.6117	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A09103	A discussion of the ansvvere of M. VVilliam Barlovv, D. of Diuinity, to the booke intituled: The iudgment of a Catholike Englishman liuing in banishment for his religion &c. Concerning the apology of the new Oath of allegiance. VVritten by the R. Father, F. Robert Persons of the Society of Iesus. VVhervnto since the said Fathers death, is annexed a generall preface, laying open the insufficiency, rayling, lying, and other misdemeanour of M. Barlow in his writing.	Parsons, Robert, 1546-1610.; Coffin, Edward, 1571-1626.	1612 (1612)	STC 19409; ESTC S114157	504,337	690

folly for saying but a supposal as though it were a speach of vncertainty I haue said sufficiēt before There remaineth his vntruth in saying that Bellar. doth suppose that if the rest of the Apostles were not made Bishops by S Peter then cannot the Church of Rome be the Mother-Church of other Churches nor the Bishop vniuersal Bishop For first as cōcerning the latter part about the Vniuersall Bishop Bellarmine hath no one word thereof but teacheth the quite contrary founding the power and authority of S. Peter ouer all other Churches vpon other groundes and namely vpon the commission of Christ Matth. 16. ●oan 20. not vpon his ordayning or not ordayning Bishops of the other Apostles about which question he doth but set downe the opinion of Ioannes de Tu●re●remata lib. 2. Summae de Ecclesia Cap. 32. with his reasons ●or the same and consequently doth not ●et it downe as a supposall certaine ground or principle but as a probable and disputable opinion though himself hould the opinion of Turrecremata to be more probable But on the other side Franciscus de Victoria heere cited by M. Barlow himsel●e though he be of a contrary opinion to Turrecremata and to Bellarmine about the Ordination of all the Apostles by S. Peter yet doth he in the very same place professe that S. Peter was Vniuersall Bishop ouer all the Church of God Primus Princeps cum summa supertotam Ecclesiam pot●state That among the Apostles he was the first and principall with supreme power ouer all the Church So as the denial of this particul●r priuiledge in S. Peter that he ordained all other Apostles Bishops doth not in●e●e that he was not vniuersall Bishop of the whole Church as here we see M. Barlow most falsely to inferre And whereas he noteth in the margent with great diligence diuers Catholicke writers that d●● hold the question to be probable on both sids as Salmeron Victoria Suarez and Gregorius de Val●ntia that is but an old trick to shu●●le and make a noice where there is no need for Bellarmine doth not hold the thing to be de fide or infallible supposall and consequently it little importeth to bring in this diuersity of opinions of the a●oresayd Authors about the matter Now then to come to the second vntruth that the Pope by decreeing the Oath as it lay was vnlawfull did also forbid euen that very point of s●earing ciuill obedience which is so notoriously vntrue as whosoeuer doth but read the Popes Breue it selfe or Cardinall Bellarmine his explication therof or my Letter wherin the contrary is euery where protested wil maruaile to see such impudent proceeding But of this more afterward Now wee shall passe to discusse whether there be any pointes in the sayd Oath concerning the religion and consciences of Catholicks whereby the taking thereof was made vnlawfull vnto them For this doth Maister Barlow vtterly deny as now you shall heare WHETHER THE OATH BE ONLY OF CIVILL OBEDIENCE Or whether there be any clauses in it against Catholicke Religion CHAP. II. THIS point being one of the most chief of al my Treatise about the Oath is hādled by me somewhat largely pag. 13. of my Letter where vpon the deni●ll of the Apologer that any thing is there required but Ciuill obedience my wordes are these And how shall we cleare t●is important matter to wit VVhether there be any poyntes in th● Oath belonging to religion besides ciuill obedience and I do answer that it is v●ry easy to cleare the same by fower seuerall and distinct wa●es First by the expresse wordes sense and drift of the Oath it selfe that besides the acknowledgemen● of temporall respects to wit that our Soueraigne is t●●● K●ng right●ull Lord ouer all his dominions and ●hat the swearer is his true loyall subiect to obey him in all temporall affayres and other like clauses whereat no man sticketh or maketh difficulty there be other clauses also against the authority of the Supreme Pastour which doe iustly breed scruple of conscience to a Catholicke to ●dmit or take the same Secondly I shewed the same by the Popes wordes in his Breues wherin he doth conioyne the taking of this Oath with the going to the Churches and Seruice of a different Religion pronouncing the one and the other to be vnlawfull Thirdly I declared the same out of the iudgment of Cardinall Bellarmine other learned men who hauing considered well the nature of this Oath and different clauses therin cōtayned do hold it for so cautelously compounded by artificially ioyning togeather Temporal and Spirituall thinges to wit Ciuill Obedience forswearing the Popes supreme Ecclesiasticall Authority as no man can thereby prof●sse his temporall subiection and detest treason and conspiracy which all Catholikes are most willing to doe but he must be forced also to renoūce the Primacy of the Sea Apostolicke from which all good Catho●ick consciences do iustly abhorre Fourthly for a more full and finall clearing of this matter that I could thinke of no better nor more forcible meane then to make this reall offer on the behalfe of euery English Catholicke for better satisfaction of his Maiestie in this poynt so much vrged of their ciuill and temporall obedience First that he will sweare and acknowledge most willingly all those partes and clauses of the Oath that do any way appertayne to the Ciuil and Temporall obedience due to his Maiesty whom he acknowledgeth for his true and lawfull King and Soueraigne ouer all his dominions and that he will sweare vnto him as much loyalty as euer any Catholicke Subiect of England did vnto their lawfull Kinges in former tymes and ages before the change of King Henry the eight or that a●y forrayne subiect oweth or ought to sweare to any Catholicke Prince whatsoeuer at this day These were the ●oure wayes which then occurred 〈◊〉 my mind wherunto it shall be good to examine brie●●y what M. Barlow hath bene able to say in this his answ●●● He beginneth resolu●ely as though he had intention 〈◊〉 ioyn● really indeed Now then saith he this must be cle●●●● whether the Oath doth onely concerne ciuill obedience yea or no 〈◊〉 that it doth not the Censurer taketh vpon him to satisfy in eight ●●●bers ●rom the 20. to the 28. and that foure seuerall waies So ●e And what doth he alleage against these foure waie● 〈◊〉 e●fect no word at all though he babble not a little of diuers matters impertinent to the purpose VVe laying this 〈◊〉 our ground saith he that first both swearing and performing 〈◊〉 obedience is aswell negative against any intruder challenger or vs●●per as affirmatiue ●or the lawfull gouernours and Soueraignes Secondly that this challeng of the Pope in dethroning and deposing of Pri●ces is a temporall intrusion and no spirituall iurisdi●tion do c●●cl●●● with a strong and apparant euidence that the whole bulke of the O●●● both in the submissiue and exclusiue part doth

out of Plato Aristophanes and other Greeke Authors may be proued And albeit I will not stand to defend that in the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 M. Barlow doth wrong Plutarke and Gracchus in translating headdy vndertaker rather then magnanimous yet doth he offer them open iniury in translating the other epithete 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for a rash speaker whereas indeed it signifyeth to Gracc●us his praise a prompt and ready man in speaking eloquent copious and the like But as for the other exprobrations of a most violent spirit impatient of contradiction and the rest he abuseth ●gregiously both Gracchus Plutarke for not only are those reproaches not found there as applyable to Gracchus but the very contrary is sayd of him and therin is he preferred before his brother Caius in these words of Plutarke Vul●u obtutu motu bla●d● erat compositus Tyberius acer Caius vehemēs Deinde or ati● suln●nans Caij dulcior Tyberij pari modo in victu mensa frugalis s●●rplex Tyberius c. lenis etiam placidus confragosus alter seruidus Tyberius both in countenance and motion was a●●●ble and composed Caius sharpe and vehement and consequently to this the Orations of Caius were thundering but those of Tyberius more sweete and in like manner Tyberi●● was more frugall and simple in his dyet and table then his brother Caius he was also very gentle and pleasing in his behauiour and speach but the other was rough and feruent c. Now then let the prudent reader see and consider how all this doth agree to the description of Tyberi●● set downe by M. Barlow and how true a man he is in all his assertions And how false soeuer he was in the allegation certaine it is that he dealt most wickedly in the application of all to the person of his Holines that now liueth And this much shall suffice about this matter It followeth pag 27. 28. after he had discharged such a storme against the Popes owne person as now you haue heard for his medling in this Oath and giuing his decisiō therof he sayth that this was to be Iudg in his owne cause alleaging a Poet for his proofe about sur latro one pleading at the barre the other sitting at the bench But doth not the malicious man see that this his cauillation toucheth the interest of all Princes as though they might not be Iudges or giue sentence in cases wherein themselues haue a part if law stand with thē For to cause other men to do it in their name by their authority is as much as to do it themselues And what did the Pope more in this case thē this making a decision by counsaile of his learned men according to Christian law that this case of England touched points of Religion concerning the Sea Apostolick which authority no Pope can infringe or diminish without sinne if he would for that it was giuē not only to him but to his ant●cessors and successors in like māner to indure for the good of the whole Church to the worlds end But saith M. Barlow it had bene plaine dealing in the Pope if before he had sent his Breues of Interdiction he had acquainted his Mai●stie with encounters of doubt that bred the quarrell and the ouer-swaying reason that carried him to the negatiue Very wisely spoken and worth the wit of M. Barlow And would his Maiesty haue admitted the messenger or message who seeth not that there is nothing heere but trifling and caueling But I may adde also scoulding for he breaketh presently into a most desperate blast of rayling against F. Perso●s calling him trayterous Absolom that careth not to set his ●●●e friendes land yea to see his natiue soile on a light fire so he may purchase the Popes fauour All which is spoken with much passion little reason for that the probability is much more that Maister Barlow flattereth the Kinges Maiesty for hope of preferment whereof he is capable and hath gotten possession of a good part already then ●a Persons the Pope whose state and condition of life hath no need of such preferment nor can it be proued that euer Father Persons spake for a fee forward and backward as M. Barlow hath done in his best Patrones cause As for the authority of the sixt Councell of Carthage about appellations to Rome noted in the margent it is not worth the answering both for that the words nor sense alleadged by him are there found and the controuersie about Appeales to Rome from Africa is so handled by me at large in my last Reckoning with M. Morton and he found so faulty and defectuous in that accompt● as if M. Barlow will take vpon him to pay that debt and to answer that only Paragraph for him I shall say that he is his friend indeed Wherefore I expect the euent In the very next lines following M. Barlow doth so brokenly recite my wordes about M●●●is aliena another mans haruest for so did the Apologer write that English Catholikes are to the Pope that he maketh neyther me nor himselfe to be vnderstood Read I pray you his relation of my wordes pag. 29. numb 5. and see whether you can vnderstand him about M●ss●●aliena My words were plaine inough for thus I wrote page 12. numb 20. by him cited For first about putting the Popes hooke in ano●●er mans haruest supposing as we do that we ●●●a●e of Cat●olike people onely and according to Catholike doctrine and in matters belonging to Catholike m●ns soules and consciences it cannot be called Messisali●na another mans haruest that the Pope dealeth in England with such kind of people in such cases as well as in Spaine France Flaunders Italy Germany Polonia and other States and kingdomes for that they are no lesse appertayning to his ●●ock care charge and haruest then the rest Neyther doth the materiall separation of our Iland separate vs from the vnion of one body nor of one obedience to one and the selfe same generall head and Pastour no more then it doth frō the vnion of one beliefe and of one number and forme of Sacraments of one manner of seruice and other like pointes belonging to the internall and externall vnity of Catholike Religion And is not this plaine inough How doth he reply You shall heare it in his owne wordes and he will so imbroyle himselfe therin as he will let fall neere halfe a dozen of absurdities ignorances and open falsities by the way Do you stand attent then ● thus he bringeth his answere to my former discourse of Messis aliena This is a 〈◊〉 argument no doubt quoth he the Pope hath to do in England sait● the Censurer because some Catholikes suppose he hath but before this supposall be brought into a positiue resolute conclusion it will aske a longer time then such a Pamphlet c. Where you see first that he quite mistaketh me eyther

necessity in some occurrents which we say he hath done by leauing sufficient authority in S. Peter● Successours to remedy the same not by their triple Cro●●es but by vertue of their Supreme Ecclesiasticall Authority including indirectly this temporall when great necessity vrgeth euen then when they were most poore and lay in caues and vaw●es vnder ground though there occurred not then occasions to vse the same And thus now would I end this matter but that I must say a word or two concerning two Authours cited in the margent about the same The first is of Aluarus Pelagius an ancient Canonist saith he of their owne who talking of the Mathematicall donation of Constantine saith Palea est at Ecclesia pro gran● habe● And then do●h English it that is chaffe indeed though the Church doth hold it for good corne which word though they be in Aluarus yet are they alledged by M. Barlow no lesse thē commonly are other Authours by him cyted with a guilty conscience for that he well knew that Aluarus doth not hold that Donation to be chaffe but doth approue the same to be true in diuers places of his workes as namely lib. 1. cap. 43. lib. 2. cap. 29. and elswhere which M. Barlow could not choose but know by Aluarus his owne words and wh●le discourse as also for that otherwise he had co●fessed himselfe to hold against the Church who being a Catholike an ancient Canonist of our owne as M. Barlow sayth would neuer haue done nor can be presumed to haue done What then will you say was his meaning in those words quae palea est at Ecclesia pro grano habe● Sur●ly his meaning is far differēt from that wherin M. Barlow cyteth him And this is that Gratian Compiler of the Canons hau●ng this word Palea set downe in his D●cretall and prefixed before diuers Chapters not to signify therby Ch●ffe or contemptible matter to be conteyned therin● 〈◊〉 rather that it was eyther the collection or addition of one Protopalea that was a Cardinall as diuers graue Authors do write or some later collections of Gratia● himselfe noted in the margent for memory and distinction sake with this word Palea deriued eyther from the Greeke word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifieth ancient or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that signifieth rursum or againe as who would say they were additions to the former collections whereof the Reader may see more in the Preface to the first volume of Gratian his Decretalls But in what sense soeuer the word Palea is there takē certayne it is that it doth not signify Chaffe in Al●ar●● his iudgement though he doth allude to the words Chaffe and corne for that the common signification of the latin word Palea importeth Chaffe but that he himselfe did not hold those things for Chaffe and contemptible which are conteyned in Gratian vnder the titles of Palea may appeare by the very first Chapter so intituled which conteyne the words and determination of S. Gregory the first written vnto S. Augustine our Apostle and recorded by Venerable Bede so that the meaning of Aluarus was that albeit this donation of Constantine was recorded by Gratian vnder the title of Palea yet the Church doth hold it for corne that is to say for a matter of truth about which I remit me to those Authors that did write of that affaire lōg before Gratian as Petrus Damianus accompted for a most holy learned man before the Conquest Iuo Carnotēsis others So as here the vntruth of M. Barlow alledging of Aluarus against his owne meaning is euident that he intended therby to deceiue his Reader As for the second that is Bertrand in the addition vpon a glosse of the Common law whom M. Barlow alleadgeth to say that our Lord sauing his reuerence had failed in his discretion for gouernment of this Church if he had not left such a gouernement therein for deposing of incorrigible Princes there is no great matter to be stood vpon therin but only his manner of simple speach which M. Barlow out of his sincerity maketh alwayes worse by his relation for wheras Bert●and saith Videretur Dominus God should seeme to haue fayled this man maketh him say God had fayled and wher●s Bertrand saith vt cum reuerentia ei● l●quar that I may speake it with due reuerence or regard vnto him M. Barlow translateth sauing his reuerence which i● our English phrase seemeth contemptible And thus he helpeth himself out at euery tu●ne with sleights and shifts neuer vsing sincerity commonly in any thing that passeth from his pen against vs. VVHETHER THE DEVISING AND VRGING OF THIS NEVV OATH VVERE A BLESSING or no eyther to the Receauers or Vrgers AND first of the Receiuers Wherein is handled also of Conscience and of swearing against Conscience CHAP. IIII. AFTER humble supplication made in my Letter to his Maiesty as you haue heard that it would please him to admit the acceptance of this Oath by his Catholicke subiects in the forme and substance that should be allowable by Catholicke Doctrine by yielding all dutifull temporall obedience vnto his Maiesty his heires and successors with reseruation only of their consciences in points that concerne their Religion I was forced to ●●swere some few lines about that which was sayd in the Apology that God did blesse this godly deuise and intent of making and vrging this Oath by ●he admittanc● therof by so many Prie●●es and Laickes I thinke it good to repeat my owne wordes againe to the end I may be the better vnderstood But before I do this it shall not be perhaps amisse to set downe the relation of my sayd wordes by M. Barlow wherby you may see how faithfully and sincerely he doth relate them as well here as in all other places for this is his fashion albeit he set them downe in a se●erall distinct letter to the end the Reader may imagine that they be mine indeed Is it be a blessing saith he it must bee so first to the takers which are of two sortes eyther in act which are sworne already or in desire which wish they might and dare not The fi●st haue no outwar● blessing of liberty for they are still imprisoned if inward blessing of comfort he knowes not But to the other it is the greatest pressure of conscience and angariation of minde that euer be●ell them for that oppr●ssion exceedes all other eyther corporall for paines or worldly for losse This is my speach as he setteth it downe both ragged scarce coherent if you consider it well and this cou●se he holdeth throughout the whole booke that he maketh me speake as pleaseth him to appoint me My owne speach is that which ensueth somewhat more cleare and perspicuous at least wise as you wil see About this matter sayd I where the Apology saith That God did bl●sse this godly deuise and intent of making and vrging this Oath by the admittance

was this I find no such thing in the Breue at all as that Temporall Obedience is against faith saluation of soules nor doth the Breue forbid it nor doth any learned Catholike affirme that the Pope hath power to make new Articles of Faith nay rather it is the full consent of all Catholike Deuines that the Pope and all the Church togeather cannot make any new Article of beliefe that was not truth before though they may explane what poynts are to be held for matters of faith and what not vpon any new heresies or doubts arising which articles so declared though they be more particulerly and perspicuously knowne now for points of faith and so to be belieued after the declaration of the Church then before yet had they before the selfe same truth in themselues that now they haue Nor hath the said Church added any thing to them but this declaration only As for example when Salomon declared the true Mother of the child that was in doubt he made her not the true Mother therby nor added any thing to the truth of her being the Mother but only the declaration Wherfore this also of ascribing power to the Pope of making new Articles of fayth is a meere calumniation amongst the rest So in my former writing now we shall examine what M. Barlow replyeth about these two points In the first whether the Oath do containe only temporall Obedience he is very briefe for hauing repeated my words by abbreuiation that the Popes Breue forbids not temporall Obedience No saith he it forbids the Oath wherin is only acknowledgment of ciuill Allegiance But this we deny and haue often denied and still must deny and craue the proofe at M. Barlowes hands who though he hath often affirmed the same yet hath he neuer proued it by any one argument worth the reciting which notwithstanding is the only or principall thing that he should proue For that being once proued all controuersie about this Oath were ended And it is a strange kind of demeanour so often and euery where to affirme it and neuer to proue it He addeth for his reason in this place He that prohibits the swearing against a vsurping deposer denieth temporall obedience to his rightfull Soueraigne and sayth neuer a word more But what doth this proue Or in what forme is this argument For if vnto this Maior proposition he shall add a Minor that we do so or that the Popes Breue doth so we vtterly deny it as manifestly false For who will say that the Popes Breue prohibits swearing against an vsurping deposer Or what Catholike will say that his refusall of swearing is against such a one and not rather against the authority of his lawfull Pastour Wherfore this proofe is nothing at all● But he hath another within a leafe after which is much more strange for he bringeth me for a witnes against my selfe in these words VVhat hitherto sayth he he ●a● laboured to confute and now peremptorily denyeth that the Breue ●●insayeth not Obedience in ciuill things he plainly now confesseth and gr●●teth If this be so that I do grant the Popes Breue to prohibite obedience in temporall thinges then will I graunt also that M. Barlow indeed hath gotten an aduantage and some cause to vaunt but if no word of this be true and that it is only a fond sleight of his owne then may you imagne to what pouerty the man is driuen that is forced to inuent these silly shifts Let vs lay forth then the mystery or rather misery of this matter as himselfe relateth it The Pope saith he being iustly taxed for not expressing any cause or reason of the vnlw●ulnes of the Oath the Epistler saith there are as many reasons that it is vnlawfull as there are points in the Oath which concerne religion against which they must sweare And is not this a good reason say I Is not the forswearing of any one poynt of Catholike Religion sufficient to stay the cōscience of a Catholike man from swearing But how doth be proue by this that I confesse the Breue to forbid temporall Obedience Do you marke I pray you his inference and consider his acumen But there is no one poynt sayth he in the Oath that doth not so to wit that doth not concerne Religion euen that first Article which meerely toucheth ciuill obedience I do sweare before God that King Iames is the lawfull King of this Realme c. Ergo I do grant that the Breue forbiddeth the swearing to all the Articles and consequently leaueth no Obedience ciuill or temporall But do not you see how he contradicteth himselfe in the selfe same line when he sayth that there is no one point that concerneth not religion euen the very first Article that toucheth meerly ciuill obedience For if it touch only and meerly ciuill obedience ●hen doth it not touch religiō in our sense For that we do distinguish these two deuiding the Oath into two seuerall parts the one conteyning points of temporall obedience for acknowledging the right of his Maiesty in his Crownes the other concerning points of Catholike Religion belonging to the Popes Authority To the first wherof we refuse not to sweare but only against the second And now M. Barlow sayth that all concerne religion and consequently we grant that the Popes Breue alloweth no temporall obedience but denieth all And is not this a worthy dispute But let vs passe to the second question whether the Pope or Church hath authority to make new Articles of faith as the Apologer obiected And first to my declaration before set downe to the negatiue part that the Catholicke Church pre●endeth not any such authority to make new articles of faith that were not of themselues true and of faith before he obiecteth first Doctor Stapletons saying that the Pope and Councell may make the Apocryphall bookes named Hermes and the Constitutions of Clement to be Canonicall Whereto I answere that Doctor Stapleton sayth only that as the ancyent Christian Church had authority vpon due examination by instinct of the holy Ghost to receaue into the Canon of deuine Bookes some that were not admitted before as for example the Epistles of S. Iames the two bookes of Machabees the Epistle of Iude and diuers others as appeareth in the third Councell of Carthage wherein S. Augustine himselfe was present and su●scribed so hath the same Church at this day and shall haue vnto the worlds end authority to do the same Si id ei sanctus Spiritus suggereret sayth Doctour Stapleton that is if the holy Ghost shall suggest the same vnto her● librum aliquem al●●m n●ndum in Can●nem recep●um Apostolorum tamen tempore conscriptum c. to receaue into the Canon some other booke written in the time of the Apostles and neuer reiected by the Church though it were not receiued for Canonicall before giuing instance of the said two bookes of Hermes

and Cl●ments Constitu●ions before mentioned So teacheth Doctor Stapleton and the reason of his saying is for that the authority of the Church is the same now shal be vnto the worlds end as it was in the first ages to iudge of Scriptures when occasion is offered And if the Church should admit any such booke now into the Canon of holy Scriptures which was not held for Scripture before which yet is a case not like to fall out then should no● this booke be made Scripture by the Church but only declared to be such which was so from the beginning though not so knowne declared So as the Church in this case should not giue infallibility of truth vnto the booke but only testimony by instinct of the holy Ghost that this booke was such from the beginning though not so accepted So as you must note two cogging tricks of M. Barlow in cyting Doctour Stapletons words first to conceale his first condition Si id ei Spiritus Sanctus suggereret if the holy Ghost should suggest the same vnto the Church and then these other two conditions if it were written in the time of the Apostles and neuer reiected by the Church which omissions were made by M. Barlow of purpose to make M. Doctour Stapletons speach to appeare more naked and improbable but indeed it was to keep his old custome which is neuer commonly to relate things truly in all respects in any citation whatsoeuer His second obiection is out of Bishop Fisher VVho sayth quoth he that whatsoeuer the Pope with a Councell deliuereth vs to be belieued that is to be receiued as an Article of fayth which we graunting to be true do ad only this that it is to be vnderstood according to our former declaration and as the Bishop himselfe expoundeth it against ●uther out of Scotus saying Non quòd ●unc verum Ecclesia fecerit sed à Deotraditum explicauerit sayth Scotus not for that the Church made true this Article for it was true before but ●or that it did declare it to be true and to haue bene deliuered by God and this by direction of the holy Ghost promised by our Sauiour to the Church So sayth Bishop Fisher. Here now you see that neyther the Church nor the Pope Head therof do pretend to make any new Article of fayth that was not in it selfe an article of fayth before yea and so belieued also fide implicita by implyed fayth in the faith of the Church but only the intention of the Church is to declare it to haue byn such from the beginning though not so knowne or declared and therfore men were not bound to belieue it fide explicita by expresse fayth as now they are after the Churches definition and declaration therof And that this is the common sense of all Catholicke Deuines according to my former wordes that the Pope and all the Church togeather cannot make any new Article of beliefe that was not truth before at which assertion of mine M. Barlow maketh much adoe as though it were false is proued among other learned men of our dayes by Gregorius de Valentia whose wordes are that it is Sententia communis Theologorum the common opinion of Deuines for which he citeth in particuler a multitude of Authors principall Schoolemen And his whole discourse founded vpon Scriptures Fathers Councells and other arguments consisteth in this that as whatsoeuer is now belieued by the Church for matter of fayth was in substance belieued before in all other precedent ages vnto Christes time actu fidei implicito by an implyed act of fayth that is to say the belieuing in generall whatsoeuer the Church belieued so many thinges are now belieued by the Church actu fidei explicito by expresse fayth which were not so belieued before for that the Church frō time to time hath had authority to explaine matters more clearly and expresly which before were belieued by an implied faith only As for example the first Councell of Nice though it determined nothing for the p●oceeding of the holy Ghost from the Father and Sonne as was afterward declared vnto vs by the Church but that it belieued the same yet may we not deny but that it belieued the same not fide explici●a but implicita only And so in like manner the other Articles of faith and explications therof made by the subsequent Councels about the vnity of the Person differēt Natures in Christ that his Mother should be called the Mother of God were belieued implicitè by those of the Councel of Nyce and consequently were then also Articles of faith though they were not belieued by them explicitè as we are bound to do after the explication made by the Church Let vs conclude therfore with Bishop Fi●●ers owne words against M. Barlow Quod tame●si nequeat Sum●●● Pontisex c. That albeit the Pope with a Councel that is to say the Catholick Church cannot make any thing true or false that is not true or false of it selfe and consequently cannot make any new articles of faith yet whatsoeuer the said Church shal deliuer vnto vs as an Article of faith that al true Christians ought to belieue as an Article of faith which Scotus also himselfe in the same place affirmeth Thus Bishop Fisher whome you see how impertinently M. Barlow alleadgeth against my assertion saith the very same that I do Let vs go forward Thirdly then he obiecteth S. Thomas of Aquine who talking of the different Creeds that are set forth concerning the Articles of our faith some more large and some more briefe demandeth to whome appertayneth noua Editio Symboli the new Edition of a Creed when the necessity of new heresies doth require And he sayth it belongeth to the Pope as Head of the Church And what is this against me Did not S. Athanasius also set forth his Creed though he were not Pope with addition of many Articles for explanations sake which were not expressely in the Apostles Creed though in substāce of truth they were nothing different Did not diuers Councells set forth Credes with sundry explanations that were not before All which standeth vpon this ground so much pondered by ● Irenaeus that the Apostles had all truth reuealed vnto them by Christ and they left the same in the Church so as whatsoeuer is or hath or shal be added afterward by the said Church are only explications of that first reueiled truth and the childish babling here of M. Barlow to the cōtrary is to no purpose at al for he citeth diuers authors for that which we deny not but yet alwaies commonly with addition of some vntruth of his owne as heere he alleadgeth out of the Iesuit Azor that it belongeth vnto the Pope to define Dogmata fidei Doctrines of faith which we deny not but when he addeth that this belongeth vnto the Pope only and not to a Councel this is his owne inuention for Azor ioyneth them