feare to doe the like as hee that offendeth against the common order of the Church hurteth the authoritie of the magistrate and woundeth the consciences of the weake Loe Traditions not onely auowed but maintained the infringers censured So that but reade ouer your Position againe That Apostolicall traditions and auncient customes of the holy Church are not to be receiued nor doe oblige vs compare that with this decision and then giue your Catholike honesty the lye Euery particular or national Church hath authority to ordaine to change and abolish ceremonies or Rites of the Church ordained onely by mans authoritie so that all things be done vnto edification Nor is this against your Catholique Doctrine or practise and yet this is all that our Church deliuereth touching traditions in their publique authorised receiued constitutions Priuate opinions if there be any tye vs no more then they doe you Nay we deale more sincerely and positiuely than you doe distinguishing Traditions for plainenesse sake whereas your Fathers of Trent giue this onely in commaund That Traditions be receiued as the Scripture playing fast and loose in ambigiuous termes not differencing humane diuine Apostolicall Apotacticall Christian Paganish generall particular free of necessity temporary or permanent Traditions Can you or any Papist defend this The Popish Doctrine thus deliuered is not onely contrary to expresse words of your owne Bibles but to pietie and religion to sense and reason that any idle fantasticke foolish impious prophane humane inuention for your words runne generally and extend to all should be receiued as Holy Scripture but the protestant doctrine declared as before is not contrary to expresse words of our Bibles 2 Thessal 2. 15. Therefore Brethren stand fast and hold the traditions which yee haue receiued whether by word or by our Epistle Therefore c. Wee deny not obedience vnto this exhortation but indeauour to stand fast in the word of truth and hold fast all those Traditions which Saint Paul deliuered either by word or writing All Protestants giue due respect to such diuine authority Shew any that doth not and you say somewhat But good Sir Gagger Hee that refuseth those manifold botcheries and brokerages of your Romish Church and casteth them off as impious and ridiculous doth not streight transgresse this Apostolicall direction no more than he that reiecteth a counterfeit Passe made by some jarkman vnder an hedge for a Rogue doth resist lawfull authority Proue your Tradition such as you pretend then see what we will say vnto you 2 Thessal 3. 6. Now we command you brethren in the name of the Lord Iesus Christ that you withdraw you selues from euery brother that walketh disorderly and not after the Tradition he receiued of vs. Which we receiue and obey But Tradition may runne for Example here in effect not according to our example And so Saint Chrysostome vpon the place or it may be something extant also in writing or order prescribed them by the Apostle temporary and occasionall or of morall dispensation If you can name it wee will not refuse for our conclusion differerh not from yours Traditions are to be receiued and doe oblige vs but you must let vs know them and their credite first 1 Cor. 11. 2. I praise you brethren saith the Apostle that you remember mee in all things and keepe the Traditions as I haue deliuered them vnto you So hee would vs were hee now liuing so would hee not you that haue broken them for that which hee deliuered vnto them that hee receiued of the Lord 1 Cor. 11. 23. and that which hee receiued was touching the whole intire communion the Cups as well as the Bread you haue broken this Tradition through your 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and presumptions But can you resolue mee what Tradition hee meaneth heere perhaps they were Temporall and not intended for vs. If such your owne rule is They oblige not It may be no vnwritten Traditions but the written word at least such things as be written now Howsoeuer the allegation is not to purpose for it doth not proue what the Protestants deny and that which it proueth they deny not That Traditions are to be kept 2 Timoth. 2. 2. Where there is no expresse mention of Traditions but onely of things receiued from Saint Paul by which Traditions peraduenture not written are meant and peraduenture things written who can tell whether these or those shew them and we refuse them not Iohn 20. 30. and 21 25. are both to one purpose Tradition is in neither text expressed nor to be collected from either for neither text is for Tradition both one other intimate no more but that all which Christ did or said is not recorded in the Gospels Doth any ideot belieue the contrary This fellow might begge vs if wee said or taught that Christ did nor said any thing but that is written Till then himselfe may be begged for a foole that would put vpon vs this vnhandsome beliefe All that Christ did or said is not written therefore any thing must be receiued that is pretended to be Tradition Apostolicall or Diuine 1 Cor. 11. 34. Paul saith The rest I will set in order when I come Therefore you may goe learne to bake a batch of Bread or goe drinke an health to the Vicar of St. Fooles with your Host of Holborne The inference is Saint Paul had not ordered all till hee came when hee came hee made good his promise and set all things in order at Corinth therefore any thing though neuer so absurd which Papists pretend as Tradition must be receiued as Gods word 1 Timoth. 6. 2. Saint Paul saith nothing of Tradition except these words will beare out Tradition These things teach and exhort which things are written not vnwritten For These things doe designe things there remembred Saint Iohn 2. Epist 12. saith He had many things to write vnto them which hee would not commit to paper but come himselfe and teach them by word of mouth which hee repeateth Ep. 3. vers 13. Therefore hee wrote not all things vnto them And who saith hee did therefore what our Gagger is a goose no other sequell and so hee must stand vntill hee shew that some of his Romish Traditions were part of that which Saint Iohn would not write vnto them but teach them by word of mouth Act. 16. 4. and 15. 28. Wee reade of no Traditions wee doe of Decrees ordayned in the Councell at Ierusalem but the mischiefe is they are written and yet so our Gagger and his Comerades keepe them not For tell mee did you neuer eate a Goose or her pudding Capon Hen or Chickens at your Bottle-Ale house in Partridge-Ally if not there nor otherwhere I haue nothing to say to you But if so I returne it to your teethe you belie vs in that which you doe your selues The Traditions Apostolicall and auncient customes of the holy Church oblige you not For among these Decrees or as you will
wee must relye vpon the iudgement of the Church and her Pastors There be moe Pastors in the Church then the Pope though he be granted first he is not all There be moe Churches then his Church what hath Pope Vrban one man to doe with Pastors with the Church but that which wee know well enough by Pastors and Church in conclusion you meane the Pope I could interpret Saint Anselme well enough as that if a Controuersie were referred by the Church or an Heresie to be corrected in the Church which touched the case of the Catholicke Church it could not be put ouer more fitly to any one man by the Church representatiue in a Councel then vnto the Pope first Bishop of Christendome of greatest not absolute power amongst Bishops But I know your Saint Anselme well enough This was not his meaning he was partiall post natus not fit to speake in this cause nor amongst the Fathers A great Bishop I grant him He was Archbishop of Canterbury no great Doctor but respectiuely considering the barbarous times in which hee liued farre from being one of the ancient Fathers or their grand-child He liued in the dayes of King Henry the first and was a factionist for Pope Vrban his good Lord and Master So aske my fellow if I be a thiefe your bottle-ale Hostesse where you vse it seemeth to meete in Partridge alley with your gossips is well enough acquainted with these passages and can tell you as much as Saint Anselme could if an Heretick aske her who is Supreame ale-canner on Earth shee will answer no doubt why who but his holinesse In this case I beleeue them both alike as good reason for one as for other Sure yours are no better then those Corkes with which your Hostesse vseth to stop her bottles but agree as you can you and your Hostesse we proceede to the next Proposition III. That Apostolicall traditions and ancient customes of the holy Catholique Church are not to be receiued nor doe oblige vs THis is also contrary to the expresse words of our owne Bibles How wherefore we shal see when we can In the interim thus wee draw on Traditions are of two Sorts in the writings of Antiquity as the word is ambiguous of two significations There are Traditions writteÌ„ improperly so called and there are Traditions vnwritten deliuered from hand to hand The name is sometime applyed to the one and sometime attributed to the other you meane not here Traditions written I know it no more doe we we agree to take it of vnwritten Traditions in opposition vnto Scripture as where Tertullian speaketh in his Book de coronâ militis thus Scripturam nullam invenies Traditio tibi praetenditur euictrix Scripture for this you can finde none the originall came from Tradition Traditions are considered Originally in their Authors Christ the Apostles the Church priuatemen which haue their authority more or lesse answerable to the worth of their Originals Againe they are considered materially in regard of what they treat of what they containe whereof they are of Orders Rights practices opinions in common vse and custome amongst men Traditions instituted by our Sauiour euen in points of beliefe Faith haue Diuine authority as his written word hath Traditions deriued from the Apostles haue equall authority with their Preachings and their writings I approue that processe of the Controuersor The authority of Gods Word is not because it is written but because it commeth from God Traditions of the Church haue such authority as the Church hath all binde and oblige as they were intended and as their extent is For they must be considered not onely from the Author but from the End Some were intended to be Permanent others onely to be transient for a Time onely or else for euer Some vniuersall some onely Partiall for the Catholique or else a priuate Church Such variety and difference is in Traditions which this Hudler confoundeth to deceiue his Nouice with indistinctions Now the question is not whether there be Traditions or haue beene heretofore we doe grant it in euery kinde that either there are or haue beene Traditions of Christ his Apostles the Church priuate men The question is not of what authority they are we grant their authority is from and as the Authors but the question is of their Credit and Extent First whether the pretended Traditions of Christ and his Apostles were indeed so ordained or deriued as they are pretended or rather counterseits and suppositions Proue them true vndoubted and we rise vp vnto them Secondly to what ends they were instituted whether to last and indure euer or for a time whether to supply the defects of Scripture not else sufficient for the end This we denye for it is our Position that the written Word of God without vnwritten Traditions is perfect and absolute and sufficient for the end whereto it was intended To make the man of God absolute in euery good worke Abuse not your selues nor your Proselites here slander not nor belye vs giue vs any Tradition of Christ or his Apostles giue vs good euidence for what you say goe proue it conuincingly to haue come from them by Scripture Fathers consent of Antiquity can you aske any more and we receiue it with both our armes as Gods holy Word and Institution Quae vniuersa tenet Ecclesia ab Apostolis praecepta benè traduntur quanquam scripta non reperiantur Though I finde it not vpon record in Scripture yet I receiue it as proceeding from the Apostles if the vniuersall Church imbrace it said Saint Augustine and I subscribe vnto it bring vs any such Tradition so accepted so receiued so commended and you shall see wee will reuerence it as much as you or more but if you giue me copper in stead of gold pardon me if I beleeue you not nor receiue it for pay Ecclesiasticall constitutions are moe more certaine of the same authority with the Churches written Lawes which binde generally if made for generall obligation or else particularly if they haue but locall and confined limitation omni modo bind they doe vnto obedience so long in such sort so farre forth as the authors did intend till the same authority disaâ—ow them which gaue vnto them being at the first In the 34. Article to this purpose wee reade of and concerning Ecclesiasticall Traditions It is not necessary that Traditions and ceremonies be in all places one or vtterly like for that at all times they haue beene diuers and may be changed according to diuersities of Countries times and mens manners So that nothing be ordained against Gods word Your Catholique cares be they round or long cannot be offended with this position I thinke Whosoeuer through his priuate iudgement willingly and purposely doth openly breake the Traditions and ceremonies of the Church which be not repugnant vnto the word of God and be ordained and approued by common authoritie ought to be rebuked openly that others may
the Roman Church For Saint Gregory vpon the 6. of Ezechiel said If the vnderstanding of holy scripture were playne to all men it would come in time to bee of no reckoning Where hee giueth a reason of that obscurity that is in it Who yet vpon the 6. of Iob more atfull interpreteth his owne meaning thus Sacra scriptura cibus est in locis obscurioribus quia quasi exponendo frangitur et mandendo glutitur Potus vero est in locis apertioribus quià ita sorbetur sicut invenitur The holy Scripture is Meate in the more obscure places because in the expounding thereof it is broken as it were and in chewing swallowed Drinke it is in the more perspicuous places because it is as easily swallowed downe as it is found Thus the doctrine and beliefe of the Roman Church was sometime Scripture in some places is hard in some places easie Hath that Church now forsaken her former faith if not we differ not for we maintaine the easinesse of holy Scripture no otherwise then Saint Gregory the Pope did This Goose may fit the Gagge for his Ganders mouth the Gospell will soone enough be rid of it II. That in matters of faith wee must not relye vpon the iudgement of the Church and of her Pastors but onely vpon the written Word I Know no such tenent exclusiuely I know no such Assertion negatiuely the Church of England hath no such faith as this You set vp a Shawfoule for a marke and shoot your bolt at it your selfe alone In our 11. Article put on your spectacles and see if you can reade it we professe The Church hath authority in controuersies of Faith The written word of God is the Rule of Faith with vs. And hath beene so with all our Fathers of old Vnto the Law and vnto the Prophets was a direction of a perpetuall Morallity and is continued in that of our Sauiour Ioh. 5. Search the Scriptures for in them you hope to haue eternall life A rule absolute in it selfe a rule most sufficient vnto vs for that end entended To make the man of God perfect in euery good worke Sufficiunt sanctae et diuinitus inspiratae scripturae saith Athanasius ad omnem institutionem veritatis Truth is of two sorts amongst men manifest and confessed truth or more obscure and inuolued truth In his quae aperte posita sunt in scripturis inveniâ—ntur illa omnia quae continent fidem moresque viuendi spem scilicet charitatem Plainely deliuered in Scripture are all those poynts which belong vnto Faith and manners Hope and Charity to wit And accordingly I doe know no obscurity vpon these I know none of these controuerted inter partes the Articles of our Creede are confessed on both sides and held plaine enough The controuerted poynts are of a larger and an inferiour alloy of them a man may be ignorant without any danger of his soule at all A man may resolue or oppose this way or that way without perill of perishing for euer Now if a question be moued iuris controuersi in controuerted matters who shall decide and settle the doubt you say The Church and so say I nay so say we You say wee say the Scriptures but without the Church that is each priuate mans opinion and interpretation of the Scriptures euen against the Church No such thing Sir you mistake vs. We say the Church must doe it explaining declaring resoluing the Scriptures as the direction is from God himselfe to purpose Deut. 17. 8. and as your Texts and Fathers doe pretend it and no otherwise And yet the Scripture may well be called iudge As the Law determineth Controuersies betwixt man and man In plaine cases iuris positiui no deciding Iudge or legall proceeding shall neede But such as are iuris ambigui controuersi must be determined by the Court by the Iudge according vnto Law So is it in Scripture according to the Protestants opinion In points of Faith they disclaime not the iudgement of the Church nor yet appeale to Scripture alone vnderstood by themselues without a iudge but referre it vnto the Church And they haue reason for it enough seeing Gods Word and the ancient practise of the Catholike Church that is both Law and Iudge are both for them In the name of the Church of England I will be tried thereby and maintaine it against all Papists liuing Take one for all Cyril of Hierusalem in his fourth Catechisme saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 In any poynt concerning the diuine and holy mysteries of our Faith not any the least thing must be tendred without warrant of diuine Scripture And he addeth Belieue mee not that speake and deliuer these things vnto you vnlesse for proofe of them I doe bring plaine and euident demonstration out of diuine Writ Was this man a Protestant or a Papist Those Bibles he had then which we haue now and it seemeth that addressing his owne beliefe and doctrine accordingly varied not in iudgement any whit from vs who make Scripture the rule of our beliefe And in doubtfull poynts that require determination appeale vnto the Catholique Church for iudgement in that Rule This is not contrary to any deduction from much lesse to the expresse words of our owne Bible Matt. 23. 2. The Scribes Pharises sit in Moses Chaire all therfore whatsoeuer they bid you obserue that obserue and doe Therefore c. Doe you finde eyther Faith or Iudgement Pastors or Church expresly named in this text Looke once more and looke back vpon your vndertaking Their refutation by expresse words of their owne bible For words expresse you faile vndertaking more than you can performe an ordinary tricke of Catholike Braggadochioes Let vs see if Consequents will hold the tewghing any better Those that answere the Church and her Pastors in your Thesis are the Scribes Pharises in your proofe who whole and some head and taile be Doctors and Pastors of the Church with you But of the Church of Rome it must be supposed for wee disclaime any Conformation at all with them And doe you suppose that our Sauiour approued them so well as that hee would haue had the Iewes in matters of Faith to relye vpon them and their decisions as Pastors of the Church in points of Faith If this were his meaning what meant he then to giue warning elsewhere Take heede of the leauen of the Pharises that is as the holy Ghost expoundeth it Of their doctrine If the question had bin put Art thou the Christ would he haue sent them vnto the Scribes or Pharises for resolution or aduised the people to belieue on them we finde it not practised the contrary we doe What then is this text in consequence vnto the poynt Surely hee meant no more but this and in that hee will declare himselfe a Protestant Whatsoeuer they bid you obserue out of Moses obserue that is so long as they teach but Scripture they must he heard if there they faile
Ecclesiasticall and ciuill not any thing to purpose for Church or for her Pastors propounded The last out of 2 Thessal 2. 15. was wont to passe currant for vnwritten verities now it commeth in limping for Church and Pastors resolue where it shall stand and then we will ranke it in degree and desert So I would could I tell where to finde them they walke in tenebris I cannot speake with them by cleare day-light In briefe what they affirme I professe I cannot tell I know many things which they affirme in those remembred bookes and passages but what the man here meaneth I can but guesse at so dissolute and at randome are his quotations as if to name and muster vp some Fathers were enough as I can coniecture so come I to them if I misse I must haue better information hereafter Gregorie Nazianz. in Oratione excusat saith somewhat I resolue of and to some purpose but what I certainely doe not know nor yet which Oration is by him intended For I finde not any vnder that title in Billius whom these men follow vnlesse it be one of his Apologies In the former of which two I finde somewhat that may looke that way this In Ecclesijs constituit vt alij pascantur pareant quibus videlicet id conducit ac cum sermone tum opere ad officium diriguntur alij autem ad Ecclesiae perfectionem Pastores ac magistri sunt qui virtute coniunctioneque ac apud Deum familiaritate vulgo sublimiores sunt rationem animae ad corpus aut mentis ad animam obtinentes A thing reasonable profitable and of absolute necessitie for the being of a Church to haue a distinction of Pastors and People some to teach some to be taught to leade to be led to rule to obey a thing established practised and defended in England no otherwise then was in the Primitiue Church and is in the Church of Rome at this day Vnlesse wee can see more shewed vs in Gregory Nazianzene we haue seene but little vnto any purpose yet and other thing then this I know not Tertullian next to be seene against Heretickes prescribeth the rule of Faith so doe we appealeth to the first institution of the Catholicke Church of Christ in his Apostles and to their Doctrine then taught and deliuered and so doe wee aboue all primerily thereto he descendeth vnto Succession so will we Not any prescription insisted vpon by Tertullian but I embrace it and dare appeale vnto it and stand to the award thereof Ex fide personas approbantes non ex personis fidem Is this that which he would haue with Tertul. out of Chapter 21. What Christ reuealed vnto his Apostles to be preached I will prescribe that it ought to be proued no otherwise then by testimony of those Churches which were first founded by the Apostles in their preaching partly by word of mouth and partly afterward by writing If this be the place of Tertullian meant by the Gagger then Currat a Gods name we accept the Condition and ioyne issue and come on with Tertullian as it insueth Si haec ita sunt If this be so it must needs be that all Doctrine which concordeth with those Apostolicall mother and originall Churches is true as being that selfe-same which the Churches receiued from the Apostles they from Christ Christ from God Whatsoeuer other Doctrine is beside this is false against the truth of the Apostles Christ and God Thus he thus we I desire no other Iudge or better triall ioyne issue when you will or when you dare I accept the Condition for any point controuerted betwixt the Church of England and Rome at this day for 500. yeeres after Christ at least Discipulus magistrum Cyprian commeth next to be seene in his 55. Epistle or as your Authors suggest it Lib. 1. Epist 3. In which Epistle I cou'd pitch vpon places moe then one that happily you may entend for they looke this way but that which is purposed I suppose is this in the second sect Actum est de Episcopatus vigore de Ecclesiae gubernandae sublimi ac divinâ potestate The rather because the Texts of Scripture here cited are by Pamelius the Roman Scholiast there applyed though to no purpose For it is the receiued Doctrine of the Church of England that in the office of a Bishop there should be that vigor as he calleth it and that the Calling it selfe is Diuine and an high calling Nor doth any Papist liuing more respect and approue that saying of Saint Cyprian in the same Epistle Sect. 19. then our Church of England doth Non est ad hoc deponenda Catholicae Ecclesiae dignitas c. The honor and the dignity of the Catholick Church is not to be abased so farre nor the vnspotted maiesty of the Flocke of Christ or Priestlike power and authority to be so deiected that men consisting out of the Church should dare professe they will passe censure vpon a Bishop of the Church That Heretickes should presume to censure Christians wounded men iudge the sound lapsed men those that neuer fell guilty persons iudge the Iudge Impious Sacrilegists the Priests This you approue so doe we To what end doe you will vs see Saint Cyprian Or Saint Augustine against Cresconius the Donatist if yet wee could tell where in speciall and what to see is this that which you meane Cap. 33. We vphold the truth of Scripture when we doe that which the vniversall Church commandeth recommended by authority of the Scriptures so farre as that because the Scripture cannot deceiue a man that would not willingly erre in this question obscure should goe and enquire what the Church saith of it If this be the place as in all likelihood it is we subscribe vnto it with all our hearts For in Diuinity Questions Controuersi Iuris there must bee a Iudge to determine that wee say is the Church whether part contending hath Law right that is consent of Scripture vpon his side and we professe with the same Saint August in his 118. Disputare contra id quod vniuersa Ecclesià sentit insolentissimae est insaniae A most in solent franticke foole were he that would dispute against the tenent of the vniuersall Church Sir bring vs to the triall and gagge vs if you can with this resolution of Saint Augustine belye vs not for our opinions against your knowledge But all this while wee haue seene in the Fathers what wee could finde or imagine yet wee neuer saw cleerely till the close Drinke was your arrand but draffe would you haue your plea hath beene for the Church and Pastors your intent was meerely for the Pope for so Saint Anselme Lib. de Incarnat cap. 1. written vnto Pope Vrban saith vnto him Vnto no other is more rightly referred to be corrected whatsoeuer ariseth in the Church against the Catholicke Faith What is this saying of S. Anselme vnto vs in matters of faith
shall not depart is Gods promise Mans promise reciprocall is I will not depart from them If I depart that is if man faile They may and shall depart God is then free Now this supposed what assurance is there for my words shall not depart c So your first Text is mistaken peraduenture in the meaning but without peraduenture in the allegation It is Esay 5â— 21. not as you tender it from your aduisers 49. 21. And lastly it is to be vnderstood of the Church of the Iewes in particular conuerted vnto Christ as it seemeth by Saint Paul Rom. 11. 26. and not of the Church of the Christians already conuerted and so you misapply as well as mistake But more ridiculously in your second Text Iohn 14. 16. For haue you read or heard that euer any Protestant maintained That the holy Ghost can erre I suppose not I beleeue you are not so much past shame to say so and yet your conclusion is so The spirit of truth cannot erre For hauing recited the Text of the Gospell your illation is Therefore the spirit of truth hath aboade for euer and shall abide for euer with the Church and consequently cannot erre What Sir cannot erre To my vnderstanding The Spirit of Truth cannot erre can you vnderstand it otherwise But let your barbarismes goe by to the point I answer first you faile and that confessedly in your vndertakings It is but consequently the Church cannot erre therefore confessed not expresly Secondly I answer out of the Text it selfe This promise is for comfort not instruction The Comforter shall abide for euer for Christ there spake of affliction which should ensue Thirdly were it punctually for direction we might reioyne It was a temporary promise a personall priuiledge to the Apostles you thought wee would say so belike supposing wee had no other shift silly men like your selfe therefore you come in with by way of preuention But the Apostles themselues could not abide for euer poore foole that knowest not there is duplex aeternum frequent in Scripture Gods euer and mans euer That for euerlasting as God is This for the terme of his being so for euer is thus no more then while you are all the dayes of your life But we seeke no aduantage we will not take it we grant Gods Spirit eternally assistant to the Catholique Church then represented in the Apostles and therefore we admit that you belye vs in your Proposition The Church can erre to be vnderstood of the Catholique Church as is expressed The third Text in order Esay 35. 8. is so farre from expressing the not erring of the Church that it is a question though such a Nouice as you know it not whether it be to be taken of the Church at all Hierome in his Comments expoundeth it of Christ who saith of himselfe Iohn 14. I am the way the truth the life An high way shall be there and a way and it shall be called the way of holinesse the vncleane shall not passe ouer it but it shall be for those The way faring men though fooles shall not erre therein Who told you that this way was the Church why not the Scripture which is also a way and called a way as to my remembrance the Church is not Ibi erit semita via mundissima quae sancta vocabitur c. There shall be a path saith Hierome and a most cleane way which shall be called Holy and which saith of himselfe I am the way by which way the polluted cannot passe where also we reade it spoken in the Psalme Blessed are the vndefiled in the way And this way that is our God shall be vnto vs so direct so plaine so open and champion that no wandring shall be there Fooles and silly men may walke therein vnto whom in the Prouerbs wisdome speaketh thus If there be any little ones let them come vnto me and shee hath spoken vnto the Fooles Come you and eate of my bread Thus Hierome vpon the place Tertullian in 4. against Marcion is indifferent for Christ the head of the Church or Faith in Christ the life of the Church Your Worship Sir Gagger out of your authoritie cast it meerely vpon the Church Satis pro Imperio if you can out-beare it Howsoeuer it is not expresse as it should be Not to purpose if it were expresse our question is not whether fooles can erre but whether the Church can erre The Church hath often beene compared to a Ship and now at last by you made a Ship of Fooles Content so you be Pilot in that Ship Sir Foole. Once at length you rightly bid vs goe see more For the Text of Iohn 16. 13. is more expresse than all the former He shall leade you into all truth But what if this text concerne not truth vpon Earth but Truth in Heauen What becommeth then of your Not erring Augustine and Bede encline that way What if it be personall vnto the Apostles alone not to the Church or their successours Hee will shew you the things to come and I haue many things to say vnto you but you cannot beare them now these such like passages doe more than seeme to conclude it vnto them What if he meant but All things that were necessary and conuenient for them to know so Theophylact Euthymius and others In this sort the Church is eternally directed so the Church directed cannot erre Matth. 18. 17. It is commaunded by authoritie Tell the Church and heare the Church No good proofe the Church cannot erre For the Scribes and Pharises were to be heard and obeyed yet had no assurance of infallibility Kings and Princes are to be obeyed yet haue they fallen into great enormities Ephes 5. 27. the Church is said to be glorious without spot or wrinckle or blame which is to be vnderstood de toâ—o integrato of the parts in Heauen and earth Of the time to come rather than present Without blame yet not without wrinckle euen here for error may be where blame is none Esay 9. 7. the Kingdome of Christ is to be established with iudgement and with iustice for euer and yet I know no such priuiledge annexed to iudgement or iustice of infallibility No more then Ezech. 37. 26. to a Couenant of peace an Euerlasting couenant to multiplying of them or placing Gods Sanctuary amongst them for euer Luk. 22. 32. and Matth. 23. 3. What correspondency haue they one with another not to speake of reference vnto the poynt In the former Peters faith was prayed for that it might not faile and yet Peter denied Christ Iesus If Peter were not the Church what maketh this Text amongst the rabbâ—e If Peter were the Church may erre as Peter fayled though not eternally one or other In the latter the Pharises must be heard And therefore will you say they erred not If they erred as doubtlesse they did then to what purpose are they pretended for not erring of the Church Much good may the
performe what seruice in his course was determined and assigned by Lot It fell to Zachary to burne Incense as to others to offer Sacrifice Now the Temple of Ierusalem had diuers diuisions as wee haue in our Churches Isles Chauncels Reuestries These were seuered by Vayles Trauerses or Walles The first was the Sanctuary or most holy Place No People or Priest went in thither at all but onely one once a yeere and no oftner then once that one day the high Priest and no other man The second was called the holy Place the Altar of Incense stood there whereat the Priests offered Incense vnto God in their Courses as Zachary here did and nothing else neither reading the Law nor expounding of it nor teaching the People nor praying with them nor saying any deuotions for them it was no Custome or part of Seruice there A third diuision was atrium sacerdotum the body of the Church into which none came but onely Priests and they to offer Sacrifice onely The People came not so high but into a fourth Court atrium populi or mundorum in which they were praying at that present So betwixt the place in which Zachary offered Incense which was seuered by a vayle and that place in which the People prayed there was some distance what maruell if the People could not heare him But as is touched they needed not for he was not to read expound or say any part of Seruice within but onely to burne Incense and no more There were that taught them beside they did it in the place for the purpose in the Peoples Court and in that tongue which the People vnderstood So our Sauiour taught in the Synagogues and in the Temple being vnderstood and Moses was read in the same forme and Language that euery one vnderstood If it had beene added that the People were praying in Latin Greeke or in some other exoticke Language this Tale-teller had noted somewhat to purpose This which he saith and noteth iâ— as much to purpose as mother Bumly hitting a Hen in the forehead Leuit. 16. 17. And there shall be no man in the Tabernacle of the Congregation when he goeth in to make an atonement in the holy place vntill hee conuent and haue made an atonement for himselfe for his Houshold and for all the Congregation of Israel Therefore Conclude Aron must goe in alone For of Aron and his Successors is this spoken When he goeth he must goe alone Now what is this to purpose Therefore it is not forbidden in holy Scripture that the publike seruice of the Church should be in an vnknowne tongue A poke full a plummes no foote nor foote-steps of such an inference at least let vs haue it with this exception vnlesse at one time onely of the yeere for onely once what the high Priest hither But to purpose This Text is to no purpose For there must be Assistants where the Seruice is in an vnknowen tongue and here Assistants are shut out of doores It is precise There shall be no man in the Tabernacle when he goeth in If no man there no seer no hearer present then what neede we talke of tongues either vnderstood or not vnderstood Secondly the Textis to no purpose For it speaketh but of a peece of Iewish seruice and of such a peece as was performed by hands onely without lippes or tongue and then it was priuate betwixt God and the Priest Priests nor People were Agents or Assistants at it Let your morrow Massmungers when they masse it alone vse Iaponian or Mexico Language if they list and when they make priuate intercession vnto God speake in any of the Dialects that were at Babel but in the publique Seruice of the Church Piety and Practice reason and Religion require a tongue that is vnderstood of the Assistants that they may say Amen to what is spoken It is a tricke of vanity an idle flourish What shall I neede to produce authorities of Fathers when the practice of the Christian World for many hundred yeeres together is contrary vnto Protestants A very strange practice of which there is no Constat let but one Father say so and I yeeld the bucklers Inopem te copia fecit Such plenty you haue as hath made you poore If you name me one Father that thought so or wrote so I will goe with you to Masse to morrow and acknowledge Pope Vrban for absolute Monarch directly ouer all the Earth I can but laugh at your insolent and impudent folly that blush not to write What neede I produce authority of Fathers I say againe doe name me but one that squinteth that way nedum that saith it positiuely That the seruice of the Church hath beene or may be in a tongue vnknowne and haue with you to Masse next morrow VII That Saint Peter was not first or chiefe amongst the Apostles and that none was greater or lesser amongst the twelue First or chiefe how ignorantly spoken as if two words of one signification First and Chiefe are not euer of equall extent Ruben was the first but Iuda chiefe First and Chiefe in some things are not euer so in all Peter was first but Iohn chiefe in respect of Christs speciall and peculiar affection to him aboue the rest of the Apostles It is graunted Peter was first called to be an Apostle though not first to be a Disciple In rancke and reckoning wee graunt him first As in your first Text of Matth. 10. 2. No Protestant liuing will deny this nor fall so foule with their owne Bible perswade not your selfe they will doe so But this precedency will neither serue your turne nor content you Another chiefedome must be cast vpon which you collect by sequell for you haue it not expresse out of Luke 22. 32. and 26. and yet at last you fleete backe to his first-ship in place Peter is euer named first Thus you are not resolued what to haue and how can your Proselites tell in what to trust you but that you leade them hoodwinked by the nose Luke 22. 26. The words is greatest is chiefe doe euidently shew that among the twelue one was indeede ter than another and so accounted by Christ himselfe Proue that by Christ himselfe Those words insisted on doe not proue it for they may be an Irony or a Concession Admit there be greater or lesser amongst you yet hee that is greatest let him be thus or thus He that thinketh so highly of himselfe yet let him doe thus But let it be euident and graunted that one was greater than another amongst them this greatnesse yet is farre short of that transcendent greatnesse giuen to Saint Peter Let Saint Peter be the man inuested with that greatnesse yet quousque What bounds and limitation had it since the greatest greatnesse vnder Sunne is not without some circumscription It is not questioned whether Saint Peter were great whether the greatest among those great ones Wee graunt it but the controuersie is about the extent and
from all thy sinnes If this be acknowledged the Doctrine of our Communion Booke and practice of our Church accordingly as it is iniurious are those opposites vnto truth and lyers against their owne knowledge that impute it to vs which wee are confessed to deny That none but God can forgiue sinnes This must proceede out of faction or that which is worse But this fellow proceedeth vpon a further extreamity to strengthen a truth in it selfe with a lye made by himselfe that our Doctrine is contrary to our Bibles Matth. 9. 3. 8. To proue against vs that which we deny not viz. this power delegated vnto Priesthood thus you alledge But when the multitude saw it they maruailed and glorified God who had giuen such power vnto men as to forgiue sins Which words As to forgiue sinnes are not in our Bibles out of which you vndertake to proue your Assertion Nor in your owne Bibles follow which you will You haue added them out of your store to serue your owne turne contrary to Scripture and further contrary to sense Because that thing which amazed them then for which they glorified God was a thing sensible visible apprehended of all When they saw it Now see sinnes forgiuen they could not heare it pronounced belieue it they might Secondly the power there giuen is not ordinary as that of absolution is but extraordinary and miraculous to heale the sicke Peter and his Successour had that but very few or none had this You know it was answered a Pope once when he shewed a masse of Gold and Siluer to one and added The Church could not say now Siluer and Gold haue I none No quoth the other Nor can it say Arise and walke This is that power there mentioned could you see it not that of Absolution ordinary That of Ioh. 20. 21. Matth. 16. 19. Giue that power vnto the Apostles to forgiue sinnes But may it not be excepted it was a personall priuiledge I answere not so for I belieue it not The collation was originall to them as to those from whom it was to be conueyed vnto others But some are happely of that opinion and it may seeme probable vnto others you should haue cleared the Texts of that obiection and then your performance had beene to purpose Matth. 16. 19. May be vnderstood you meane of sinnes forgiuen but yet only secondarily for thesi secunda Because we reade in the Euangelist whatsoeuer and not whomsoeuer this place is to be vnderstood of any knot whatsoeuer indeede rather of the power of the sword than of the keyes And it seemeth that if this place be not personall to Peter and his successors as by this allegation for forgiuing it neither is nor can be then our most holy Father hath lost a maine pillar of his Papacy peculiar to Saint Peter and his successours So these Madianites sheath their swords one in anothers sides and crosse themselues in their owne positions In Matth. 18. 18. The Text is so expresse to the purpose that Origen Chrysostome Theophilact and Anastasius vnderstand it of all Christians whomsoeuer that sundry Roman Catholiques if Maldonate deceiue vs not vnderstand it of no more than ciuill policy Goe take it Whatsoeuer you binde on earth shall be bound in Heauen and whatsoeuer you loose in Earth it shall be loosed in Heauen as your selues will for the power and execution of the keyes Wee deny not in any sort that power is giuen vnto mortall men to forgiue sinnes on earth nor to binde by excommunication which is frequently practised and peraduenture too frequently amongst vs. Vnto that 1 Cor. 5. 5. Artic. 33. thus wee subscribe That person who by open denunciation of the Church is rightly cut off from the vnity of the Church and excommunicated ought to be auoyded and to be taken of the whole multitude of the faithfull as an Heathen and a Publican vntill hee be openly reconciled by penance and receiued into the Church by a Iudge that hath authoritie thereunto And in this sort Saint Paul deliuered Hymenaeus and Alexander 1 Timoth. 1. 20. and forgaue the incestuous Corinthian 2 Cor. 2. 10. Which places by your direction wee haue seene and finde the Article agreeing with them As for 2 Cor. 5. 19. It is not to purpose of forgiuing sinnes by delegated authority vnto a Priest but of Reconciling by the whole office and function of the ministry God was in Christ saith the Apostle and reconciled the world vnto himselfe not imputing their sinnes vnto them and hath committed to vs the word of reconciliation So wee haue seene eyther nothing at all to purpose or else that of which wee made no question nor yet doe any at all As little in Fathers that affirme the same Irenaeus Lib. 5. cap. 14. saith the raising of Lazarus from death to life was a Symbole or figure of our Resurrection from Sinne to God Hee saith no more that I can see or finde Ambrose Lib. 1. it should be de paenitent cap. 7. Nor August Tract 49. in Iohn Nor Gregor hom 26. in Euangel if wee may belieue Bellarmine Lib. 3. de paenitent cap. 3. from whom you transcribed these testimonies without considering of these Fathers in their owne workes but so carelessely that if you were a Schoole-Boy lures in corpore for you referre vs to Gregor hom 26. in Euangel Whereas Bellarmine hath it 6. and to Ambrose Lib. de paenitentia as if Saint Ambrose had written but one Booke of that Argument not diuided into Chapters whereas Bellarmine directed you aright to the seauenth Chapter of his 1. Booke Was this securitie stupiditie or insolency in you or what was it XII That wee must not confesse our Sinnes but onely vnto God THat wee must not implyeth a flat negatiue or iniunction rather vnto the contrary Shew mee any such inhibition and I will say which I belieue you neuer will deserue at any Protestants hands you are a true dealing and an honest man Otherwise you are that you are and so will be still The most that hath beene saide is that priuate confession is free not tyed and therefore suus positiui not diuini Therefore happely of conueniency not of absolute necessity That in a priuate Confession vnto a Priest a peculiar enumeration of all Sinnes both of commission and omission with all circumstances and accidents is neuer necessary necessarily most an end not expedient nor yet all things considered required It is confessed that all Priests and none but Priests haue power to forgiue sinnes It is confessed that priuate Confession vnto a Priestâ— is of very ancient practice in the Church of excellent vse and practise being discreetly handled Wee refuse it to none if men require it if neede be to haue it We vrge it and perswade it in extreames Wee require it in case of perplexitie for the quieting of men disturbed and their consciences It hath beene so acknowledged by your fellowes that in the visitation of the sicke it is
faciunt quod secus Christus c. The Cup of the Lord communicated to the Laity And again Quomodo possumus propter Christum sanguinem fundere qui sanguinem Christi erubescimus bibere By which reason of Saint Cyprian no Roman Lay-Catholique can shead his bloud for Christ that neuer drank the bloud of Christ Which argument he vseth in another place Epist 54. Sect. 2. With what ground can we teach or exhort them to shead their owne bloudin confessing the Name of Christ if putting them forth vpon that seruice wee denie them the bloud of Christ or how can wee dispose and fit them to drink the cup of Martyrdome vnlesse wee first admit them to their right of communication in drinking the Lords cup in the Church Let our good Catholiques answer this who so punctually forsooth and precisely follow the steps of Antiquity without any swaruing These are all within 300 yeers after Christ and all expresse for the Cup. Athanasius in his second Apologie being accused for breaking a Chalice writeth thus What manner of cup or when or where was it broken In euery house in euery shop there are many pots any which if a man break hee committeth not sacriledge But if any man willingly break the sacred chalice he committeth sacriledge but that chalice is no where but where there is a lawfull Bishop This is the vse destined to that chalice none other wherein you according to institution do drink vnto and before the Laity This was the custome in Athanasius time this in all the Fathers times as I could deduct almost out of euery one This is euery where the custome in all the world vnto this day but in the Roman exorbitant Church as Cassander saith and was not quite abolished in that Church till about 1300 yeeres after Christ and by much art colluding and fine forgery was retained from being cast out of that Church in the late Conuenticle of Trent onely kept-in for a faction but mightily opposed by learned honest and conscionable Catholiques For why who can alter Christ's Institution who dare change that which he hath ordained Sacrificium verum plenum tune offert in Ecclesia Deo Patri si sic incipiat offerre secundùm quod ipsum Christum videat obtulisse saith Saint Cyprian But saith he again and we knowe it is true Constat Dominum obtulisse calicem in commemorationem Passionis Et quia Passionis eius mentionem in sacrificijs omnibus facimâ—â— nihil aliud quà m quod ille fecit facere debemus Why Because otherwise wee offer not the Sacrifice as wee should Nec sacrificium Dominicum legitima sanctificatione celebramus nisi oblatio et sacrificium nostrum responderit Passioni and that cannot be without powring out of wine that representeth the sheading of his bloud But your Church hath altred it presumptuously done Who gaue your Church such authority Heare Saint Cyprian again Quare si solus Christus audiendus est non debemus attendere quid alius ante nos faciendum putauerit sed quid qui ante omnes est Christus prior fecerit Neque enim hominis consuetudinem sequi oportet sed Dei veritatem Nam si Iesus Christus Dominus Deus noster ipse est summus Sacerdos Dei Patris sacrificium Patri seipsum primus obtulit hoc fieri in sui commemorationem praecepit vtique ille sacerdos vice Christi verè fungitur qui id quod Christus fecit imitatur sacrificium verum ac plenum tunc offert in Ecclesia Deo Patri si sic incipiat offerre secundùm quod ipsum Christum videat obtulisse You doo not this therefore in Saint Cyprian's iudgement your sacrifice is neither full nor true Much more in that Epistle Saint Cyprian hath and also elsewhere vnto the purpose But you haue Scriptures for the nonce expresly in our Bibles contrary to that we teach and practice to iustifie what you practise and teach touching this sacriledge and perfidiousnesse in altering Christs institution Maruell you should haue Scripture against Scripture Christs institution beeing so direct for Drink you all Produce your Scriptures Ioh. 6. 51. If any man eat of this Bread hee shall liue for euer And the Bread which I will giue is my flesh Heere is eating of Bread and that same Bread Christs flesh but heere is no such matter as wee ought to receiue Bread onely or that Bread alone sufficeth Yes for Lo euerlasting life attributed by our Lord himselfe to eating onely vnder one kinde I grant for doe they in your countrey vse to eat vnder two kindes Is Wine eaten with spoones there I haue heard of communicating and receiuing vnder one kinde but neuer till now heard talke of eating vnder one kinde Goe learne to speake and then write In the Interim I take your meaning Christ that mentioneth onely eating doth not exclude drinking doth not say nor meane eating onely sufficeth Bread is not exclusiue heere no more then where our Sauiour went to eat Bread with a Pharise at which time in your Learning and Logick he did not drink all dinner-time or supper-time because he went onely to eat Bread But Sir your wisdome must knowe that hee which eateth Bread according to the Scripture phrase drinketh also Bread importing necessaries for mans life and to eat Bread is both to eat and drink as to eat his Body is as well to drink his bloud So anon the same Euangelist Vnlesse you eat the flesh of the Sonne of man and drink his bloud you shall not haue life in you Lo heere euerlasting life not had without drinking Looke you to this if you looke to haue euerlasting life Iohn 4. 14. Christ promiseth Water to drink of which water whoso tasteth shall thirst no more therefore say you He promised no Wine therefore say I By your reason hee gaue not Bread Therefore if needs you will haue one kinde and no more haue it in Wine not Bread Againe hee telleth his Disciples else-where that hee would drink no more of the fruit of the vine vntill hee drink it new in the Kingdome of God hee maketh no mention of any Bread Therefore in Heauen belike Wine is drink and onely Wine drunk but they eat no Bread there And yet wee read of Angels food which I can tell you who take it literally I might say our Sauiour speaketh heere of Bread and not of Wine in regard of that fore-going occasion which was the first motiue vnto this his Discourse namely his miraculous feeding 5000 men with fiue loaues so that hee kept him to the Subiect and occasion But this wise mans obseruation is cleane cashierd by our Sauiours Epexegesis afterward ver 53 54. hee plainely and expresly maketh it plaine that hee meant not to exclude bloud speaking of flesh nor shut out Wine where he mentioned Bread Euerlasting life to returne your owne words vpon your self is attributed by our Lord not to eating onely vnder one but both kinds Except you eat the flesh