because the Author of it hath borrowed both the matter and manner of writing from St. Peter and therfore he was thought some scholar of theirs but no Apostle Others said he brought in a profane Author concerning the strife of the Arch-angell and the Devill about the body of Moses which cannot be found in Canonicall Scripture Lastly the Revelation of St. John was likewise doubted of first because of the noveltie of the title of John the Divine secondly because of the difficultie and obscuritie of his Prophecies These and the like reasons were motives to some in the Church to question the Authors of those Books but it was never generally impeached For further proofe of this Assertion let antiquitie be heard and it will appeare that all those Bookes were cited for doctrine of faith by the writers of the first ages and consequently were approved from and after the dayes of the Apostles Hieronym ad Dardan◠de terra repromissionis Ep. 129. p. 1105. Looke upon St. Hierome he proclaimes it to the Church Illud nostris dicendum est Be it known to our men that the Epistle to the Hebrewes is not only received by all the Churches of the East that now presently are but by all Ecclesiasticall writers of the Greek Churches that have beene heretofore as the Epistle of Paul though many thinke it rather to be written by Barnabas or Clemens and that it skilleth not who wrote it seeing it was writby an Author approved in the Church of God and is daily read in the same This ancient Father shewes plainly that howsoever some doubt was made of the Author of that Epistle yet it was received both by the Easterne Westerne Churches And howsoever some of the Ancients did attribute it to St. Luke others as namely Tertullian did attribute it to Barnabas yet all agreed in this that it had an Apostolike spirit and accordingly Cardinall Bellarmine tels you in your eare Ineptè dici vetustatem de hac Epistola dubitâsse Bell. de verbo Dei lib. 1. cap. 17. It is foolishly spoken in saying Antiquitie did doubt of this Epistle when there is but one Caius a Grecian and two or three Romanists in respect of all the rest that speake against it and if we respect not the multitude but the antiquitie of the cause the Roman Clemens is more ancient than Caius and Clemens Alexandrinus than Tertullian and Dionysius Areopagita than both who cites this Epistle of Paul by name Touching the second Epistle of St. Peter it was cited by Higinus Bishop of Rome within an hundred and fiftie yeares after Christ and that by the name of Peter The Epistle of St. Jude was cited by Dionysius Areopagita by the name of Jude the Apostle within seventie yeares after Christ Dionys de divinis nominibus cap. 4. Tertuil de habitu muliebri Orig. l. 5. in c. 5. ad Romanos Cypr. in lib. ad Novatianum by Tertullian within two hundred yeares after Christ by Origen and Cyprian within two hundred and fiftie yeares after Christ Lastly touching the Revelation of St. John it was received for Canonicall in the first and best ages Dionysius Areopagita cals the Revelation The secret and mysticall vision of Christs beloved Disciple Arcanam mysticam visionem dile cti discipuli Dionys Eccles Hier. cap. 3. In Dial. cum Tryphone Iren. lib. 1. cap. ult and this was seventie yeares after Christ Justin Martyr doth attribute this Booke to St. John and doth account it for a divine Revelation and this was an hundred and sixtie yeares after Christ Irenaeus saith this Revelation was manifested unto St. John and seene of him but a little before his time and this was an hundred and eightie yeares after Christ Tertull. de praescript l. 4. Tertullian amongst other things accuseth Cerdon and Marcion of heresies for rejecting the Revelation and this was two hundred yeares after Christ Origen in his Preface before the Gospel of St. John sayth that John the sonne of Zebedee saw in the Revelation an Angel flying thorow the middest of Heaven having the eternall Gospel and hee flourished two hundred and thirtie yeares after Christ Thus you see the Catholique Christians and most ancient Fathers in the first ages received both the Epistle to the Hebrewes the second Epistle of St. Peter the Epistle of St. Jude and the Revelation of St. John with one consent accounting them no better than Hereticks which either doubted of them or denyed them and yet you to outface the truth would make the world beleeve that it was three or foure hundred yeares before they were received into the Church and made canonicall and upon this vaine supposall you would know of me Whether there were any change of faith in the Church when they were admitted or whether those Books received any change in themselves To answer you in a word your proposition is foolish and your question is frivolous for those Books were alwayes received even from the first times and no more could that word of God bee changed than God himselfe who is immutable and yet we see your faith is daily altered for want of that foundation and thereupon it behoves you to get more and better proofes for the confirmation of your new Creed From your justification of your Trent faith you begin to looke asquint thorow your Spectacles at the reformed Churches and after your wonted manner you crie out They have no certaine rule of faith wherewith wee may urge them authoritie of Church they have none Scripture they have indeed but so mangled corrupted perverted by translation and mis-interpreted according to their owne fancies that as they have it it is as good as nothing Thus you Have we no certaine rule of faith What thinke you of the Scriptures Doe not we make them the sole rule of our faith and is not that rule by your own Cardinals confession Bell. de verbo Deo l. 1. c. 2. Regula credendi certissima tutissimaque the most certaine and safest rule of faith And as touching the authority of the Church it is an Article of our Religion Art 20. That the Church hath power to decree rites or ceremonies authoritie in controversies of faith and yet it is not lawfull for the Church to ordaine any thing that is contrarie to Gods word written neither may it so expound one place of Scripture that it be repugnant to another This Article shewes our obedience to the Scriptures it declares the authoritie of our Church and it vindicates our Ministers from perverting and misinterpreting of the Scriptures wherewith you charge us in the next place It is true say you Scripture you have indeed but mangled corrupted perverted by translation Here your charge is generall and your accusation capitall therefore you must give me leave for the better discoverie of the truth to send out a Melius inquirendum that your Translation and ours being compared in particulars the truth may better appeare First then
published by Pope Pius the fourth were never anciently received pag 25. The 39 Articles of the Church of England justified pag. 30. Papists teach that the Pope hath power to create new Articles of Faith pag. 33. Many Doctrines of Poperie are new by the confession of Papists themselves pag. 38. Protestants have a certaine rule of Faith Papists have not pag. 45 The Roman translation of the Bible is most corrupt pag. 51. Three sorts of corruptions and abuses of ancient Fathers 1. By foysting bastard Treatises entitling them to the Fathers 2. By falsifying their undoubted Treatises by additions detractions or mutations 3. By alleaging passages and places out of them which are not extant in their Workes and of all these three kinds Romanists are proved guiltie pag 64. Corruptions and falsifications of ancient Writers by Papists In the first Age. pag. 65. In the 2. Age. pag. 67. In the 3. pag. 68. In the 4. pag. 73. In the 5. pag. 77. In the 6. pag. 89. In the 7. pag. 90. In the 8. pag. 92. In the 9. pag. 105. In the 10. pag. 109. In the 11. pag. 110. In the 12. pag. 111. In the 13. pag. 112. In the 14. pag. 114. In the 15. pag. 115. In the 16. pag. 122. Of implicit Faith and blind Obedience maintained by Papists pag. 143. CHAP. II. Papists their bitternesse against reformed Churches is causlesse pag. 148. The definition of Heretikes agreeth to Papists but no way to Protestants pag. 151. Rome confessed to be Babylon by learned Romanists pag. 157. CHAP. III. Cassander and Caesenus are justified pag 164. Corruption in Faith as well as manners are confessed to have been in the Roman Church by the learned of that partie pag. 165. The Councell of Trent intended a reformation of Faith as well as manners pag. 173. CHAP. IV. The Catholike Faith is not so indivisible but that a man may renounce it in part though not in all as many learned Romanists have renounced the Trent Faith in part pag. 178. Priests marriage is lawfull pag. 181. CHAP. V. Romanists prefer their own interpretations of Scriptures before the ancient Fathers pag. 188. CHAP. VI. Many errours have crept into the Church whose first Authors cannot be named pag. 191. The difference between Heresie and Apostacie pag 196. CHAP. VII The petty degree of the Romish Faith is drawne from the ancient Heretikes namely the Osseni Helcheseite the Capernaites the Manichees the Aâ—gelici the Collyridians the Tacians and the Cathorists pag. 219. CHAP. VIII The Antiquitie and Vniversalitie of the Protestant Faith in generall is proved by the testimonies of our learned Adversaries pag. 253. There are but 22 Canonicall books of the old Testament as is proved by the testimonies of the ancient Fathers both of the Greeke and Latine Church pag 276. Errata in the first Part. PAge 42. line 8. reade his lin 17. r. authority in marg l. 2 r. ad Dard. p. 57. lin 11. r. their foreseene p. 66. l. 4. r. the deepe p. 75. l. 20. r. Angles p 92 in mar l. 8. r. alius in text l. 29. r. rejected p. 93. l. 16. r. serve p. 109. l. 23. r. making him speake p. 131. in mar l. 12. r. veniali p. 138. l. 25. r. very corruptly p. 139. l. 25. in marg 1. repurgata p. 153. l. 22. r. homoousians p. 164 in marg l. 25. r. vicesimi terrii p. 173. l. 23. r. operierunt p. 189. in mar l. 17 sequuntur p. 218. l. 2. r. Vitalian p. 219. l. 18. in marg r. regnum p 224. in marg l. 10. r. minus p. 248. in marg l. 12. r. curvat l. 14. r. pronus l. 18. r. iudico p. 251. l. 6. r. argument p. 255. l. 3. r. ingenuously p 257. l. 12. r. true body l. 21. r. is l. 22. dele and. p. 270. l. 4. r. looke p. 271. l. 29. r. of the. p. 273. l. 3. dele to the p. 279. l. 22. r. when To J. R. AUTHOR OF THE BOOKE CALLED A paire of Spectacles I Received a Treatise from you Mr. J. R. not long since published against me by the title of A paire of Spectacles or An Answer to a booke called Via tuta The safe way wherein you say the booke is shewed to be a Labyrinth of Errours and the Author a blinde Guide To what end your Spectacles were made for a blinde man I cannot tell for sure I am if I were blinde a paire of your Spectacles could not make me see howsoever if the indifferent Reader will look but upon the Frontispice of your own book he shall easily discerne that your glasses are deceitfull and do justly occasion a Writ of Error to be brought against your selfe for making that to seem in S. Austin your first Author which is not Your words are these Qui autem praetergreditur regulam fidei non accedit in viâ sed recedit de viâ Aug. in Joh. Tract 98. Tom. 9. p. 487. He that goeth besides the rule of faith which is the Catholique Church doth not come in the way but goeth out of the way wherein you have added these words of your owne viz. which is the Catholique Church in the same character with S. Austin and in lieu of Scripture you pretend the Church to be the rule of Faith whereas that ancient Father assures us Civitas Dei credit Scripturis Undè fides ipsa concepta est ex quâ justus vivit Aug. de Civit. Dei l. 19. c. 18. Tom. 5. Sancta Scriptura nostrae doctrinae regulam figit Idem de bono Viduitatis Tom. 4. c. 1. that from the holy and canonicall Scriptures that faith is formed and bred by which the just doe live Nay more hee expressely professeth with us that the holy Scripture doth fix or settle the rule of our doctrine And thus in your first citation you falsifie S. Austin and go besides the rule of faith and good manners also and by stumbling at the threshold you shew your selfe to bee the blinde guide you speake of in the first page and the first place I proceed to your Dedicatorie Epistle first you begin to descant upon my name in paralelling the words Lyend and Lye howsoever say you The title of Sir will be left for you These bee the first flowers of your eloquence and they savour sweetly Now if I should repay you in your owne language and shew you what men are branded with the letter R which stands for your name if I should shoot backe I say your arrowes even bitter words into your owne bosome would it not shew rather want of matter than proofe of doctrine If you delight to sit in the seat of the scornefull it shall be my comfort to tread in the steps of my Saviour who when hee was reviled reviled not againe To let passe your bitter reproaches of my learning and breeding I will come to the matter You have not stated the question say you fully and truly for you were
to shew the visibilitie of the Church by persons in all ages Then you demand of me where the Church was which S. Paul called the house of God and pillar of truth and thus you prescribe mee my weapons and teach mee how to fight Touching the visibilitie of the Church it is not to be confined within the narrow compasse of an Epistle and therefore I will answer you and your Jesuites challenge at large in place convenient and as touching your demand where the Church was which is called the pillar of truth I answer in briefe not in Rome but in Ephesus for otherwise it might seeme incongruous that the Apostle should exhort Timothy to walke circumspectly in the Church of God because the Church of Rome was the pillar and firmament of truth And therefore the Turke may better alledge this place to prove Mah mets religion being now subject to his power than you to justifie the Romish religion because Ephesus was the pillar of truth You proceed and by way of prevention you tell me the controversie is not so much of the doctrine as of the persons and then you conclude simply in the very same page The question is not of the doctrine but of the persons Oportet esse memorem I will but let you see your contradiction I quarrell it not onely I pray you tell mee in the words of sobernesse and truth did ever any wise man except your selfe undertake to prove the true Church by the visibilitie of the persons May not Jewes and Heretiques by the same reason claime a true Church because they had visible persons in all ages But say you this hath beene the way which the holy Fathers have taken either in proving the Catholique faith or disproving of heresies and for your Assertion you cite Tertullian Irenaeus Cyprian Optatus and Augustine give me leave to examine your Authors for as yet you have produced but one ancient Father and him you have falsified in the Frontispice of your booke Touching your first Author Tertull. prescript c. 32. lib. 3. Car. advers Marcion Tertullian in the first place cited by you hee demonstrates two wayes how to discerne the Church first by shewing some Apostle or Apostolicall person to have founded it next by the conformity of the doctrine to the Apostles and in his third book against Marcion which is your second citation hee hath nothing at all for your purpose Touching your second Author Iren. l. 3. c. 1 2 3. l. 4. c. 43 45 46. Irenaeus hee is expressely against you for in the first chapter and third booke cited by you he saith By the will of God they have delivered the Gospel to bee the pillar and foundation of truth In the second hee saith that when Heretiques are convinced by the Scriptures they fall to accuse them as if they were not right or of authoritie and that they are ambiguous and doubtfull In the third hee proveth the truth of the Church by the conformitie of doctrine to the Apostles not by the visibilitie as you pretend In his fourth booke cited by you he shewes that bare succession is no note of the Church and in his 45. chapter which you quote there is nothing that maketh for your question And lastly in the 46. chapter he proveth that the New Testament is as severe against fornication as the Old or rather more and this may touch the free-hold of that Church which dispenseth with Stewes but of the point in question he speakes nothing at all Touching your third Author S. Cyprian Cypr. Ep. 52. 76. in the 52. Epistle cited by you he perswades Antonianus rather to adhere to Cornelius than Novatianus and in his 76. Epistle alledged by you hee shewes that Novatianus succeeding none in that See was ordained by himselfe and therefore could bee no true Bishop but as touching the controversie in question Ne gry quidem Touching your fourth Author Optatus Optat. advers Parmen lib. 2. he handleth not the question neither maketh any thing at all for you Lastly August Psal 2. part Don. Ep. 165. de Utilit credendi c. 7. touching S. Austin you cite the second Psalme and there is nothing handled of the question you cite likewise his 165. Epistle wherein hee declares a succession of Bishops from the Apostles time to Anastasius Si ordo Episcoporum succedentium considerandus est Ep. 165. p. 751. Preculdubio ab Ecclesiâ Catholicâ sumendum exordium De Utilit credendi c. 7. Idem contr Cresc l. 1. c. 33. If saith he an orderly succession of Bishops is to be considered Yea but S. Austin say you particularly proves the question where he tels his friend Honoratus he must begin his enquirie from the Catholique Church Hee that told the Manichees wee must take our Exordium from the Church told the Donatists likewise wee must resort to that Church for the resolution of our faith which the sacred Scriptures undoubtedly demonstrate to be the true Church for in them saith he we have knowne Christ Idem Ep. 166. in them wee have knowne the Church If you can derive your succession in person and doctrine from Christ and his Apostles we will answer you as sometimes S. Austin answered Petilian the Donatist Idem contr l. Petil. l. 2. c. 85. Whether of us be Schismatiques we or you aske you not mee I will not aske you let Christ bee asked that hee may shew us his owne Church After these severall passages you returne againe to your first Author Tertullian Tertull. prescript c. 19. and with him you conclude where it shall appeare that there is the truth of Christian discipline and faith there shall bee the truth of Scriptures and Expositions And from hence you inferre that we are first to seeke the persons that professe the faith that is the Church Whereas in truth his testimony doth rather prove the persons by the doctrine than the doctrine by the persons and this is most agreeable to his owne Assertion in the third chapter Idem c. 3. Ex personis probamus fidem an ex fide personas As if hee should say wee plainly prove the persons by the doctrine not the doctrine by the persons Now put on your Spectacles and take a review of your Authors The first maketh nothing for you the second is expressely against you the third speakes not to the point in question the fourth and fifth handle the question but not at all to your advantage or our prejudice and thus you have produced foureteene severall places out of the ancient Fathers in one page and all either impertinently or falsly or directly against your selfe by which the Reader may conjecture what is like to bee the issue of your whole worke who have so grossely falsified so many authorities in your Epistle and before the entrance into the body of your booke From your lame proofes of the Churches authoritie you proceed to the justification of your maimed commandements
it were not worth the answering Pag. 20â— another while hee complaines that there is no place in the whole booke which is not either falsly or impertinently alledged one while hee proclaimes that my endevours are poore indeed and farre short of what is requisite in writing bookes another while he professeth It hath somewhat in it which may draw away an honest-minded man and that his Catholique friend was stumbled at it Now what is the reason of these impertinent excursions and contradictions It was the observation of ancient Maxentius Heretiques when they finde themselves not able to yeeld a reason of their wilfulnesse then they fall into plaine railing And certainly such is the bitternesse of this Author that were I perswaded Pythagoras transmigration of soules into other mens bodies had beene true I should beleeve that the soule of Rabshekah had beene transported into his body for otherwise if he had but a graine of charitie hee would never spurne a blinde man for so he termes me when Christian charitie teaches him another lesson If he were well versed in Antiquities hee would never have cited so many places of ancient Fathers falsly and impertinently in one page and yet condemne others of ignorance and falsification in the Fathers If hee were well read in the Booke of Wisdome I meane in the sacred Scriptures he would never have replyed with such scorne and disdaine for without doubt the Apostle spake to Mr. Lloyd the Romanist as well as to the rest of the Romans Rom. 11.3 Not to thinke of himselfe more highly than he ought to thinke but soberly according as God hath dealt to everie man the measure of faith Hee that accuseth another man of ignorance of lying of malice of execrable perjurie and the like had need be a man himselfe without all exception yet if wee may beleeve the Doctors of his owne Church he is guiltie of these and much more witnesse the Sorbonicall censure at Paris wherein Hallier and Aurelius accuse him of lying Aurelius in libri sui titulo Hallier in Admonit ad Lect. p. 8 9. of ignorance of heresie of profane scurrilitie of blasphemie and impietie of furious filthy and devillish railing of unsufferable arrogancie and the like and as touching his bitter accusations it seemes it is his accustomed manner of writing witnesse his Spongia written against the Sorbonists Aurelius in Vindiciis p. 385. under the title of Hermannus Laemilius otherwise discovered to be John Floyd I say he hath drencht his sponge in that gall of bitternesse such charitie and unitie is there amongst themselves that I may truly say of him as the Spartans sometimes said of the Theban Oratour If he think as he writes his ignorance is desperate if otherwise his conscience is seared To give you a taste of the manner of his writing when I cite authorities that are pregnant and beyond his just exception hee spares my person and condemnes the Authors themselves and complaines they are branded with the note of heresie and singularitie when as in truth they are branded onely by their Inquisitors for speaking against the errors of their Trent Doctrine being otherwise knowne members of the Roman Church When I cite an Author of our owne as namely B. Usher for translating Aelfricks Homily out of the Saxon tongue one while hee cries out Ushers corruptions are laid open to the world another while he tels mee I tooke the words from Usher because I understood not Latine or perhaps because I would be loth not to follow any errours or corruptions that come in my way and thus hee spends about ten pages sometimes inveying against our reverend and renowned Bishop sometimes against mee for false translating Aelfrick out of Latine when as the Latine cited by B. Usher in the margent See B. Ushers answer to the Jesuites challenge chap. of the Reall presence which hee takes to be Aelfricks is the Latine of Bertram and not Aelfricks whose was translated out of the Saxon tongue and not out of the Latine Againe when I cite an Author of his side as namely Petrus Crinitus for taking down of Images in Churches he stretches his throat makes this hideous exclamation Pag. 303. For your authorities of the Common Law there are so many foule faults committed by you that I know not where to begin then hee taxeth me with leaving out two principall words Humi solo whereas the Author which I cite hath no such words I render the place truly as I finde it I put not to him I take not from him I alter not one letter of his words or meaning and yet he cries out the faults are so many that I know not where to begin Againe when I cite ten or twelve Authors for our Communion in both kindes for our prayer in a knowne tongue and the like for most of them he sends me to Bellarmine for an answer for the rest saith he I le question you Then he complaines of falsifications when as in fine the Exception is against the translation of some poore word This for That and when he is destitute of any colour of answer his last refuge is this The book is prohibited As touching my Englishing of Latine Authors I confesse I have not translated whole sentences ad literam for I intended not a volume but a manuell yet I ever faithfully render the true sense and meaning of the Author Well what exception could he take to this Pag. 52. One while hee confesseth I set downe the Latine truly but I doe not translate it literally another while hee cries out It will not serve your turne Pag. 224. to say you place it in the English as you place it in the Latine for intranslation the sense is chiefly to be regarded Lastly Pag. 459. hee protesteth for himselfe that hee hath declined no Author either moderne or ancient when as it will appeare he sends many of them to Bellarmine for an answer others he rejects as condemned by the Index Expurgatorius others hee declines as unworthy of his answer by slighting them or otherwise passeth by them as children use to doe when they cannot read they thinke it best to skip over To say nothing of his Elenchs his Sophismes his Sophistry his Fallacies which are many I will trace him in his steps God willing laying aside all bitternesse and railing accusations In the meane time I will say with the Prophet David Plead thou my cause Psal 35.1 oh Lord with them that strive with me for the flouds are risen the flouds lift up their voyce Psal 93.4 5. the flouds lift up their waves the waves of the sea are mightie and rage horribly but yet the Lord that dwelleth on high is mightier An Answer to J. R. his booke called A paire of Spectacles CHAP. I. The Summe of his Answer to my first Chapter IN this his first Chapter hee endevoureth principally to prove that the Articles of the Roman Creed
doct Fidei Tom. 1. l. 2. Art 2. c. 22. p. 203. viz. that the Church could not create a new article of faith How can any such article saith he framed after many yeares be catholique and universall when as it was unknowne to our fore-fathers for foureteen hundred yeares before It was not beleeved because not heard of when the Apostle tels us faith commeth by hearing Such an article therefore although it be of faith yet it cannot be catholique and this hee proves directly from Fathers and Councels And whereas you affirme that your Church can no more make an article of faith than shee can make a Canonicall Booke of Scripture Canus loc Theol. l. 2. c. 7. p. 38. Canus your Bishop of Canaries will joyne with you That the Church of the faithfull now living cannot write a Canonicall Booke of Scripture and hee gives the reason for it There are not now any new revelations to be expected ither from the Pope or from a Councell or from the universall Church and from hence it will follow of consequence by your owne Logick Therefore the Church can create no new article of faith Thus farre I have waded in your behalfe that you may the better justifie your owne Assertion for you wil find your Church is like a house divided against it selfe and therefore cannot stand long I say that Quere which was made in Waldens dayes was resolved above two hundred yeares before by your profound Schoole-man Thomas Aquinas in your Churches behalfe that the Pope had power Condere articulos fidei to create new articles of faith to remove therefore these fig-leaves with which you would cover the naked truth This learned Doctour well understood that there were many new articles of religion crept into the Church in his dayes he knew well that albeit he were the prime Schoole man of his time yet with all his sophistrie hee could not make them comply with the ancient Catholique faith and thereupon he thought it the surest way to give the Pope an absolute and independant power over faith and religion and accordingly resolved Ad solam authoritatem summi Pontificis pertinet nova Editio Symboli sicut alia omnia quae pertinent ad totam Ecclesiam Thom. 2.2 q. 1. Art 10. It belongs onely to the authoritie of the Soveraigne Pope to make a new Edition of the Creed and all things else that concerne the universall Church Then he concludes the question and gives this reason for it The publishing of a new Creed belongs to his power who hath authoritie finally to determine matters of faith and this saith he belongs unto the Pope Upon which passages Andradius a chiefe pillar of your Trent Councell confesseth that the Bishops of Rome Romanos Pontifices multa definiendo quae anteà latitabant Symbolum Fidei augere consuevisse Andrad Def. Concil Trid. lib. 2. in defining many things which had beene formerly hidden have been accustomed to increase their Creed Now what thinke you of your Aquinas position and your Andradius confession I hope you perceive that your learned Schoole-men are of another opinion And that you may know that your Church doth not approve your pretended Tenet for Catholique doctrine hearken and consider what your holy Father the Pope declareth touching this question and then consider in what case you stand Pope Leo the tenth sent out his Bull against Luther and amongst other articles Certum est in manu Ecclesiae aut Papae prorsus non esse statuere articulos fidei Tom. 4. Conc. Par. 2. in Bulla Leon. 10. in fine Lateran Conc. novissimi p. 135. he chargeth him in particular with this that Luther should say It is certaine that it is no way in the power of the Church or Pope to ordaine articles of faith This you see is Luthers Tenet and this is yours Now what exception think you might the Pope take at this your Assertion Behold for this and the like Tenets he thundereth Anathema against him hee declareth this with the rest of his Articles to be a pestiferous pernicious scandalous and seducing errour to well-minded men he protesteth it was contrarie to all charitie contrarie to the reverence of the holy Church and mysteries of faith and in conclusion condemnes all his Articles as hereticall Inhibentes in virtute sanctae obedientiae ac sub majoris excommunicationis latae sententiae Ibid. p. 136. forbids them to be received by vertue of holy obedience and under paine of the graund Excommunication You have heard the sentence of your Lord Paramount and by it you may know your owne doome If you hold with Luther you are in danger of Excommunication and stand as a condemned heretique by his Holinesse with the Lutherans If you forsake your hold you have lost your faith And thus you have a wolfe by the eares you stand in danger whether you hold him or let him goe I wonder that you having taken so long a time to answer so poore a Work and having many Assistants for the composing of it they and you could be all ignorant of the Popes infallible Bull. Your Cardinall Bellarmine Quasi Ecclesia posterioris temporis aut deserit esse Ecclesia aut facultatem non habeat explicandi declarandi constituendi etiam jubendi quae ad fidem mores Christianos pertinent Bell. in Barcl who in these latter times hath laboured more than any other to uphold your new Articles of faith yet in obedience to the Pope and saving all advantages to his cause when in the question of deposing Kings he failed of antiquitie and proofe out of Scriptures and Fathers at last returnes this peremptorie answer As if the Church of these latter times had ceased to be a Church or had not power to explaine and declare yea to ordaine and command those things which appertaine to faith and Christian manners and that you may know that you and your Co-adjutors stand single in opinion against the Pope and his Cardinals your Jesuite Salmeron will shew you Doctrina fidei admittit additionem in essentialibus Salm. Tom. 13. Disp 6. Par. 3. §. Est ergo Idem Disp 8. that it stands with great reason to make additions in essentiall points of faith and hee gives this answer for it Because nature is not capable of all truths at one time and from this and the like reasons he concludes therefore there may be new traditions concerning faith and manners though they were never created or declared by the Apostles Thus you see the unitie amongst your selves and howsoever these positions may seeme strange to you and others of your opinions yet your Schoolmen and Lawyers have played the Popes Midwives yea Pope Leo the tenth hath put to his helping hand to deliver your Pope Pius the fourth of that issue I meane those new borne Articles of which your Church hath so long time before travailed Briefly let mee tell you your Articles are detected by your owne men
to be grandement suspicious of new coynage and if for no other cause yet for this alone they give a just occasion and jealousie when such poore shifts and evasions are devised by your Pope and his adherent to make them good for it is a true saying of a renowned Bishop and it is the faith of all reformed Catholiques B. Morton Grand Impost cap. 2. sect 2. He can onely make an article of faith who can create a soule and after make a Gospel to save that soule and then give unto that soule the gift of faith to beleeve that Gospel I proceed to your doctrine That is onely to bee called a new faith say you which is cleane of another kind that is differing or disagreeing from that was taught before Thus you I will not take advantage of your first Assertion that your faith is grounded upon the foundation of the Prophets and Apostles which you can never prove but wil joyne issue with you upon your last Assumpsit That is only to be called a new faith which is cleane of another kind and is different disagreeing from what was taught before but such are many of the Articles of Pope Pius the fourth extracted from the Councell of Trent as shall appeare by proofes at large in their proper places In the meane time let me tell you your Church teacheth not onely Novê but Nova not onely Praeter but Contra even besides and contrarie to that which she first received from the ancient Church so that howsoever you seeke to darken truth by faire and specious pretences yet in truth your Trent Additions are forraine to the faith as neither principles nor conclusions of it And that you may know and acknowledge with us that your Trent faith is differing and disagreeing from what was taught before I pray call to mind your owne confessions touching these particular Articles of your Roman Church Your doctrine touching Lay-peoples communicating under one kind namely in bread onely is an Article of the Roman faith and now generally taught and practised in the Roman Church but this practice by your owne confession is different and disagreeing from what was taught before for you say pag. 253. touching the Authors which you bring for proofe That it was the common practice of the Church for the Laytie to communicate in both kinds I allow of their authoritie Your Prayer and Service in an unknown tongue as it is now used in the Roman Church by your owne confession is different and disagreeing from what was taught before for say you pag. 270. It is true that Prayer and Service in the vulgar tongue was used in the first and best ages according to the precept of the Apostles and practice of the Fathers In the beginning it was so Your doctrine of Transubstantiation which at this day is generally received de substantia fidei for an Article of Faith yet by your owne confession is different and disagreeing from what was taught before for say you pag. 167. Transubstantiation might well be said not to have beene de substantia fidei in the Primitive Church as Yribarne speaketh because it had not beene so plainly delivered nor determined in any Councell till Gregorie the seventh his time and this was above a thousand yeares after Christ Your private or solitarie Masse wherein the Priests doe daily communicate without the people is by your own confession different and disagreeing from what was taught before and practised for say you pag. 191. They say speaking of divers Authors it was the practice of the Primitive Church to communicate everie day with the Priest I grant it These points of controversie which are so eagerly pursued by your men against the members of our Church the strength and force of truth hath extorted from you and therefore I may truly conclude Exore tuo from your owne confession that your Trent faith is new because it is different and disagreeing from what was taught before You that have taken an oath to maintaine the Papacie and are so ready to teach others you I say have either violated your oath or at leastwise have forgot your old lesson Oportet esse memorem c. for verily it behoves him that speakes lyes and contradictions to have a good memorie But it seemes you did conceive the Reader might easily passe by many such contradictions being in severall passages and farre distant pages For otherwise it would seeme strange that you which so bitterly inveigh against our reformed religion should confesse the antiquitie of our Articles and the noveltie of your owne with flat contradictions to your owne Assertions I will say to you therefore as sometimes St. Hierome spake in his Epistle to Pamachius and Oceanus Hieronym ad Pamach Oceanum Tom. 2. Thou who art a maintainer of new doctrine whatsoever thou he I pray thee spare the Romane eares spare the faith that is commanded by the Apostles mouth why goest thou about now after foure hundred yeares I may say foureteen hundred yeares to teach us that faith which we before never knew why bringest thou forth that thing that Peter and Paul never uttered Evermore untill this day the Christiam world hath beene without this doctrine To pursue the rest of your Allegations The Church of England say you admitteth of divers Books of the New Testament for Canonicall whereof there was doubt of three or foure hundred yeares to gether in the Church of God as the Epistle to the Hebrewes the second Epistle of St. Peter the Epistle of St. Jude the Apocalyps of St. John and some others which were after admitted for Canonicall 〈◊〉 I would know of him whether upon the admittance of them there were any change of faith in the Church or whether ever those books have received any change in themselves Thus you It seemes you begin to feare that your Trent faith would be discovered to be different and disagreeing from what was taught before and thereupon you would seemingly illustrate the antiquitie of your new Articles by the authoritie of the ancient Books of Canonicall Scripture But I pray where doe you find that the Books of the New Testament as namely the Epistle to the Hebrewes the Epistle of St. Peter and St. Jude and the Apocalyps were not received for three or foure hundred yeares for Canonicall It is true there was some doubt who were the right Authors of those Books but their divine authoritie was ever generally approved by all Christian Churches and allowed for Canonicall The Epistle to the Hebrewes was therefore doubted of by some because the difference diversity of the stile made them think it not to be St. Pauls and by others because the Author of it seemed to them to favour the error of the Novatian heretikes in denying the reconciliation of such as fall after Baptisme The second Epistle of St. Peter which you speake of some doubted of because of the diversitie of the style The Epistle of St. Jude was doubted
by a generall and joynt consent of the whole Catholike Church and Holy Fathers secondly by a Decree made in the late Councell holden at Trent and now lastly by that Apostolicall Authority and Power which God hath given us and therefore is to be received and accompted for a true lawfull authenticall and undoubted Copie to be read and no other in all publike and private Disputations Lectures Sermons or Expositions This Translation was published by Sixtus with great care and paines professing that he printed it in the Vatican at Rome Nostra nos ipsi manu correximus siqua prelo vitia obrepserunt Idem in Praefat. and corrected the Errours of it with his owne hands he professeth it was approved by the generall consent of the whole Catholike Church he professeth it was received for the best and most vulgar Latine Edition excluding all other Translations private or publike whatsoever and thereupon concludes Ibid. Let no man attempt to violate this our Decree our will and declaration herein or by rash boldnesse contradict it for if any shall presume so to doe let him know that he shall incurre the indignation of Almighty God and his blessed Apostles Peter and Paul From hence will arise a second Quere whether this Translation of Sixtus were that Hieromes Translation formerly confirmed and ratified by the Trent Councell If it were his and confirmed by a Generall Councell how came it to be corrected by Sixtus If it were not the same how could Sixtus Bible be allowed by a Decree made in the Councell of Trent for so are the words of his Bull whereas the Councell was called Anno 1545. and Sixtus published his Bible Anno 1592. which was above 40. yeares after the Councell was called But observe the sequell The Decree of Sixtus was kept inviolable for a short time and approved by Urban the 7th Gregory the 14th and Innocent the 9th his immediate Successors But Pope Clement the eight about seaven yeares after the death of Sixtus called in question that Translation and published another of his owne Ad perpetuam rei memoriam Clem. in praef Sixti Bibl. and corrects Sixtus Bible under this pretence that his Predecessor perceived not a few things to have crept into the Bible through default of the Presse and that it needed a second care and that certainly he himselfe had intended to bring the whole worke to the Presse againe had he not beene prevented by death These two Editions were published by two severall Popes and both commanded to be read and followed in their severall Breves Pope Sixtus disclaimes all Bibles whatsoever both Manuscripts and printed of the vulgar Edition which did not agree with his Edition Ad literam to a letter Pope Clement professeth that his Translation although it be not absolutely perfect in all points yet without doubt it is more pure and better corrected than any other that was published before it In conclusion Ne minima quidem particula mutata Sixt. in Praef. both agree that the Forme of each must be inviolably observed without the least particle of the Text added changed or detracted Now take your choyce of which Translation you please if you allow Sixtus it was corrected in many places by Pope Clement if Clements you must incurre the curse of his Predecessor Pope Sixtus if you will receive the vulgar Translation which you terme St. Hieromes your Cardinall tels you it is not of his purest Edition Lastly if you approve the vulgar Edition decreed by the Councell of Trent I say neither you nor all the Papists living can resolve which is that vulgar Edition For a Conclusion either your vulgar Translation before Clements time was corrupt or in vaine did Clement command a Correctorium to passe upon it and to be read according to that correction The worke of Lucas Brugensis who was living at that time hath sufficiently discovered your corruptions in the Bible of Sixtus which in his time was reputed for that onely Edition confirmed by the Trent Councell commanded to be read throughout all Churches and allowed by the consent of the whole Catholike Church this Bible I say which for many ages was reputed the onely authenticall Edition in your Church is purged and corrected I speake within compasse in above 3000 severall places And as it hath beene observed by a painfull labourer in that Vineyard Dr. Iames in his Bellum Papale your Translations in many places are flat contradictory each to other and he that beleeves contradictions beleeves nothing at all From the charge in generall I will descend into particulars And first I will give you an Instance in the Old Testament We reade in the 34. of Exodus and the last verse The Children of Israel saw the face that the skinne of Moses face shone Videbant faciem egredientis Moisi esse Cornutā Sixt. Bibl. Ibid. v. 29 and 35. your Sixtus Bible in the vulgar Translation twice renders it They saw his face horned but your Sixtus Senensis complaines of Hierome that contrary to the Originall he so translated it Thus one while you leave Hieromes Translation when it savours not to your Palate another while you excuse your owne by condemning of St. Hierome Now whether it were a part of that corrupt Translation which your men use and Hierome himselfe corrected Rident ita que nos execrantur Judaei quoties Mosen in noflris Tēplis cornutâ facie depictum espiciunt quasi nos eum Diabolum quendam ut ipsi stuliè interpretantur esse putemus Sixt. Senens l. 5. Annot 116. p. 368. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I dispute not but saith he therefore the Jewes doe scoffe and hate us Christians whensoever they happen to see the picture of Moses painted with hornes as though according to their Imagination we though him to have beene a Devill Looke upon the particulars in the new Testament In the third of Matthew for Repentance you translate Penance and by Penance you understand satisfaction for sinnes So that when the Evangelist saith according to the Greeke Originall Repent you follow the Latine Translation which hath an ambiguous construction and say Paenitentiam agite which your Rhemists translate Doe Penance And in the 9th of St. Matthew Math. 9.13 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 where he saith I am not come to call the Righteous but sinners to repentance you translate I am not come to call the Just but sinners and leave out the word Repentance which is in the Originall And lastly as if you were guilty of a false Translation in both in the first of St. Marke Mark 1.15 you translate the words according to the Originall and in stead of Doe Penance you rightly interpret Be penitent and beleeve the Gospel In the 11 of St. Luke you have maymed and falsified the Lords Prayer you say in this manner Father sanctified be thy name thy Kingdome come our dayly bread give us this day and forgive us our sinnes for
of the ancient Eusebius neither could he say truly that the Colein was translated by a Catholike for indeed it is the property of an Here-ticke to falsifie and corrupt the Text. And thus you have done in your Colein Edition where you have altered the sense in that manner Eusebius Emissenus Bishop of Emesa in Syria is forged by Gratian for the doctrine of Transubstantiation Grat. Dist 2. de Consecrat Quia corpus fol. Mihi 432. his words are these Christ the invisible Priest turned the visible creature into the substance of his body and bloud with his word and secret power saying Take eate this is my Body whereas there are no such words to be found in all his Works The Councell of Laodicea is falsified in favour of your Iâ—vocation of Angels The words of the Originall are these a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Conc. Laod. Can. 35. Bin. Tom. 1. p. 245. Christians ought not to forsake the Church of God and depart aside and invocate Angels and make meetings which are things forbidden If any man therefore be found to give himselfe to this privie Idolatrie let him be accursed Now in the same Councell published by James Merlyn and Fryer Crab by transmutation of a letter you are taught a lesson contrary to sense and reason saying b Quod non oporteat EcclesiaÌ„ Dei relinquere abire at que angelos nominare congregationes facere Merlin Tom. 1. Concil edit Col. An. 1530. f. 68. Crab. edit An. 1538. Colon. fol. 226. Verit as non quaerit Angulos It is not lawfull for Christians to forsake the Church of God and goe and nominate or invocate Angels or corners and make meetings and thus Angeli are become Anguli Angels are become Angles or Corners as if truth did seeke Corners when so faire an Evidence is brought against Invocation of Angels St. Basil the great Archbishop of Caesarea was forged by Pope Adrian the first at the second Councell of Nice for the worship of Images his words are these c Pro quo siguras ImaginuÌ„ eorum honoro adoro veneror specialitèr hoc enim traditum est à Sanctis Apostolis necest prohibendum acideò in omâ—ibus Ecclesiis nostris eorum designamus Historias Citat ab Adriano in Synod Nic. 2. Act. 2. p. Mihi 504. For which cause I honor and openly adore the figures of the Images speaking of the Apostles Prophets and Martyrs and this being delivered us by the Apostles is not prohibited but in all Churches we set forth their Histories This Authority was cited by Pope Adrian in the name of Basil the Great in his Epistles when as in all his Epistles of which are extant 180. there are no such words to be found St. Hierome is likewise forged for the same doctrine and by the same Pope the words in the Epistle are these Sicut permisit Deus ador are omnem gentem manufacta c. Citatur ibid. Ep. Adr. p. Mihi 506. As God gave leave to the Gentiles to worship things made with hands and to the Jewes to worship the carved workes and two golden Cherubins which Moses made so hath he given to us Christians the crosse and permitted us to paint and reverence the Images of Gods workes and so to procure him to like of our labour These words you fee are cited by your owne Pope at a generall Councell as you pretend for a point of your Romish faith and yet there are no such words nor the meaning of of them to be found in either of those Fathers and without doubt there was great scarcity of true ancient Fathers to bee found at that time to prove your adoration of Images when your Pope was driven to shifts and forgeries especially when your owne Polydore tells you Polyd. de ReruÌ„ Invent. that the worship of Images not onely Basil but almost all the ancient holy Fathers condemned for feare of Idolatrie as S. Hierome himselfe witnesseth This puts me in mind of Erasmus complaint that the same measure was afforded to Basil Eras in Praefat. lib. de Spirit Sanct. Bas which hee had otherwise observed in Athanasius Chrysostome Hierome that in the middle of Treatises many things were stuffed and forced in by others in the name of the Fathers St. Ambrose Bishop of Millaine is falsified and corrupted Franciscus Junius as an eye witnesse Junius Praefat. in Ind. Expurg Belg. tells us that at Leyden in the yeare 1559. being familiarly acquainted with Ludovicus Saurius Corrector of the Printing house and going to visit him hee found him revising of St. Ambrose workes which then Frelonius was printing after some conference had betwixt them Ludovicus shewed him some printed leaves partly cancelled and partly razed saying this is the first Impression which wee printed most faithfully according to the best Copies but two Franciscan Fryers by command have blotted out those passages and caused this alteration to my great losse and astonishment It may be the discoverie of it by Junius might stay their further printing of it or else might be an occasion to call it in after the printing for otherwise if that Impression may be had it were worthy the examination Bolseus dicit se in manibus Secretarii hâ—c testimonium vidisse inspexisse In disp de Antichristo in Apend Nu. 49. 53. Laurent Rever Rom. Eccl. p. 190. Non habent Petri haereditatem qui Petri sedem non habent Grat de Paenit Dist 1. c. Potest fieri But for a proofe of this falsified Ambrose Lessius the Jesuit tells us that Bolseck doth confesse he saw the Copie in the hands of a Secretary howsoever their later Editions are sufficient proofe of your manifold falsifications But I will speak of Impressions onely that have been within my view First to prove your succession in doctrine in your owne Church Gratian tells us from St. Ambrose They have not the succession of Peter who have not the Chayre of Peter and thus he hath changed Fidem into Sedem Faith into Chaire This forgery in time may creepe into the Body of Ambrose but as yet the words of Ambrose are agreeable to our doctrine that is a Non habent Petri haereditatem qui Petri fidem non habent Ambr. de Paenit c. 6. Tom. 1. p. 156. Basil apud Joh. Frob. An. 1527. Ambr. de Sacr. l. 4. c. 5. Tom. 4. p. 393. Basilâ—ut supra they have not the succession of Peter which want the faith of Peter These be the words of true and ancient Ambrose hereby declaring unto us and them that they may have the See of Peter and yet want the faith of Peter Againe in his Booke of the Sacrament St. Ambrose saith b Fac nobis haÌ„c oblationem ascriptam c. quod fit in figuram corports sanguinis Jesu Christi Amb. Colon. Agripp An. 1616 Tom. 4. p. 173. Make this Oblation to be a reasonable acceptable one quod est
figura which is a figure of the Body of our Lord Jesus Christ Your Ambrose printed at Colein doth mince those words and sayth quod sit in figuram as if it might stand for a figure but were no figure and more particularly in the Canon of your Masse you cite all those former words of Ambrose to prove the Antiquity of your Masse but you leave out the latter which is a figure of the Body and say c Ut nobis corp sanguis fiat dilectissimi fiâ—ii tui Domini nostri Jesu Christi Missale Parv. An. 1626 p. Mihi 82. Grant that it may be to us the body and bloud of our Lord Jesus Christ. And lastly that Ambrose might seemingly appeare to be yours in the point of Transubstantiation whereas he sheweth the power and wonders of God in creating all things of nothing by his word only and from thence concludeth d Siâ—ergo tanta vis est in sermone Domini Jesu ut inciperent esse quae non erant quant ò magis operatorius est ut sint quae erant in aliud commutentur Idem de sacr l. 4. c. 4. Basil ut suprà p. 392. If therfore there be so great force in the speech of our Lord Jesus that the things which were not begun to be namely at the first creation of all things how much more is the same powerful to make that those things may still be the same they were and yet be changed into another thing Here St. Ambrose sheweth plainly that the Elements of Bread and Wine are the same in substance as they were before although they are changed into another nature Your Inquisitours knowing well that such Doctrine is flat contrary to their Tenet which teach that the Elements are not the things in substance they were before Consecration have wisely left out in their late Edition two poore words Sint and et and accordingly the sense runneth after this manner How much more is the speech of our Lord powerfull to make that those things which were Ut quae erant in aliud commutentur Paris An. 1603 Colon. Agripp An. 1616. Tom. 4. p. 173. should bee changed into another thing And by this meanes St. Ambrose a Protestant is become a Masse Priest and with a clipped tongue lispeth Transubstantiation Fryer Walden in writing against Wickliffe cites this place by the halves ut sint et in aliud commutentur he would have the Elements one thing Wald. de sacr Euch. Tom. 2. c. 82 p. Mihi 138. b. and changed into another but excludes the principall words quae erant shewing that they should be the same which they were before and Lanfranck long before him stormed at Berengarius for citing this place out of St. Ambrose in behalfe of our Doctrine and cryes out against him O mentem amentem c. O mad mind O impudent lyar now truly there is no such words to be found in all St. Ambrose his workes Ed. Parisiis 1632. Ex editione Romanâ In quâ quae vel vitio vel incuriâ erant adjecta sunt rejecta quae sublata restituta quae transposita reposita quae depravata emendata c. In the fift age An. 400. to 500. c. But there is an Ambrose lately printed at Paris which makes a great promise of integrity and purity and yet the words are corruptly printed according to your other of Paris and Colein print In the fift age St. Chrysostome Archbishop of Constantinople is razed and purged touching the doctrine of the Sacrament his words bee these If therefore it be so dangerous a matter to transferre unto private uses those holy Vessels in which the true Body of Christ is not but the mysterie of his body is conteyned These latter words comprehended in the Parenthesis Chrys Antwerpiae apud fohannem Steelsium An. 1537. Paris apud Johannem Roigny An. 1543. Paris apud Audoenum Parvii Anno 1557. in the Editions of Antwerpe and Paris are wholly left out there is not a syllable of them to bee seene for indeed the Author of that worke saith negatively that the irue body of Christ is not there which overthrowes the very ground of your Popish presence and although your men make great brags of Antiquity to prove your reall Sacrifice of the Altar out of St. Chrysostome yet in the 19. Homily upon St. Matthew where hee termes it the Sacrifice of bread and wine Sacrificium panis vini they being also privie to this evidence as against their owne doctrine Sacrificium corporis saÌ„ guinis Christi Paris apud Audoenum Pâ—rvuÌ„ An. 1557. in c. 7. Matt. HoÌ„ 19. in their Edition at Paris have taught him to speake the Trent language in these words It is the Sacrifice of the body and bloud of Christ. Touching the Testimony of divine Scriptures St. Chrysostome is purged he tells us in his 49. Homily That from the time that Heresies invaded the Church Nunc autem nullo modo cognoscitur volentibus cognoscere quae sit Ecclesia Christi nisi tantummodò per scripturas Idem Homil. 49 Tom. 2 p. mihi 858. there can be no triall of Christianity nor refuge for Christians who are willing to know the true faith but to the divine Scriptures for at that time there is no way to know which is the true Church but by the Scriptures onely This authority is wholly agreeable to our doctrine and thereupon these times of Controversies and Heresies that have overspread the face of the Church wee say with St. Chrysostome those that be in Judaea let them flye to the Mountaines of the Scriptures But what answer can be made thinke you to the razing of so faire an Evidence Behold a Totus hic locus tanquam ab Arrianis insertus è quibusdam Codicibus nuper emendatis sublatus est Bell de verbo Dei l. 4. c. 11. Bellarmine tells us that this whole passage as if it had beene inserted into St. Chrysostome by the Arrians is blotted out of the late corrected Editions and as our learned Doctor Crakenthorpe in his answer to Spalatto observed there is above 70. lines in the Antwerpe Edition Crakenth in Spalat p. mihi 59. published 1537. purged in this Homily It seemes then it is hereticall doctrine to have recourse to the Scriptures onely for finding of the truth But sure I am it is the part of Heretikes to raze ancient Records and to avoyd the triall of their cause by the sacred Scriptures The fourth Councell of Carthage where St. Austin was present is in part forged in part razed In the 100. Canon it was thus decreed Mulier baptizare non praesumat Concil Carthag c. 100. Let no woman presume to baptize What answer therefore may we expect to this Canon Binius the publisher of the Councels expounds the meaning of it thus The Councell saith he doth decree that a woman should not presume to baptize that is when the Priest is
lust and riot of his wordly state which he hath lifted up above Kings and Emperours Lastly he complaines that the Study of Divinity is made a mocking stocke and that which was most monstrous for the Popes themselves they preferred their owne traditions before the Commandements of God These bee the pretended errors Mr. Floyd which causeth your Index expurgatorius to spare no Author for his age and yet you tell us such corner-correcting you leave for such corner-companions as shunne the light p. 144. Aeneas Sylvius who was afterwards Pope Pius the second is forbidden by your Index and the reason is given for it Aeneas wrote in behalfe of the Councell of Basil when he was a young man saith a Bell. de script Eccles de Aenea Sylvio p. 289. An. 1450. Bellarmine but when he was an old man and Pope he retracted it and so his Bookes are deservedly forbidden But what say you then to his Retractations are you pleased with them No b Cautè legenda opera Aeneae Sylvii ipse enim in Bulla Retractationis nonnulla quae scripserat daÌ„navit c. Ind. lib. prohib Class 2. a. p. 3. you must yet warily read the Workes of Aeneas Sylvius for in his Bull of Retractations hee hath condemned something himselfe which he had written and therefore when a new Edition shall come out let that Bull also be purged in the beginning of his Workes It seemes then neither that which hee wrote as a private man in his younger dayes nor that which he retracted as Pope in his latter dayes are well pleasing to your Church Let us therefore compare the difference of his Doctrine with the difference of his degrees and then you shall observe whether according to the ancient saying Honours have changed manners Aeneas Sylvius as a private man protested that c Antè NicenaÌ„ Synodum unusquisque sibi vixit parvus respectus ad EcclesiaÌ„ Romanam habebatur Aene. Sylv. in Epist 288. before the Councell of Nice each Bishop lived severally to himselfe and little regard was there then had to the Church of Rome Pope Pius the second being the same man but onely that hee was now become a Pope doth exhort and d Suadete omnibus ut id solium prae caeteris venerentur in quo salvator Dominus suos vicarios collocavit c. Bulla Retract Pii 2. Tom. Concil 4. post Concil Floren. p. 739. perswade all that they would reverence the See of Rome or that Throne of Majesty above all Aeneas Sylvius saith They thinke themselves well armed with authority that say no Councell may be kept without the consent of the Pope Ex hisce authoritatibus mirum in modum se putant armatos qui CoÌ„cilia nâ—gant fieri posse sine consensu Papae QuoruÌ„ sententia si ut ipst volunt inviolata persistat ruinaÌ„ secum Ecclesiae trahet Quid enim remedli erit si criminosus Papa perturbet Ecclesiam si animas perdat si pervertat malo exemplo populos si denique contraria fidei praedicet haereticisque dogmatibus inbuat subditos sinemusque cum ipso cuncta ruere At ego dum veteres lego historias dumastus perspicio Apostolorum hunc equidem morem non invenio ut soli Papae Concilia convocaverint nec post tempore Constantini magni alioruÌ„ AugustoruÌ„ adcongreganda Concilia quaesitus est magnopere Romani consensus Papae Idem de Concil Basil l. 1. Whose judgement if it should stand as they would have it would draw with it the decay and ruine of the Church For what remedy were there then if the Pope himselfe were vitious destroyed soules overthrew the people with evill example taught Doctrine contrary to the faith and filled his subjects full of Heresies should wee suffer all to goe to the Devill Verily when I read the old Stories and consider the acts of the Apostles I finde no such order in those dayes that onely the Pope should summon Councels And afterward the time of Constantine the Great and of other Emperours when Councels should be called there was no great accompt made of the Popes consent On the contrary Pope a Bulla Pii 2. Retractat p. mihi 739. Pius saith Order requireth that inferiours should be governed by their superiours and all should appertaine to one as the Prince and Governour of all things which are below him As Geese follow one for a leader and amongst the Bees there is but one King even so in the Church militant as also in the Church triumphant there is one Governour and Judge of all which is the Vicar of Christ Jesus from whence as from a head all power and authoritie is derived into the subordinate members Thus when he was young and had read the old Stories and considered the acts of the Apostles hee found no such Authority and respect given to the Pope but when he was Pope and old it seemes he forgat the Apostles and ancient Writers then hee attributes all power and reverence to the Pope of Rome Briefly Aeneas Sylvius saith a De Româ—nis Pontificibus liceret exempla admodum multa adferre si tempus sineret quoniam aut haeretici aut aliis imbuti vitiis sunt reperti Idem de Concil Basil lib. 1. Of the Popes of Rome wee might shew forth very many examples if time would permit that they have beene found either Hereticks or else defiled with other vices But Pope Pius saith speaking of these and the like assertions b Pudet erroris poenitet malè fecisse male dictoruÌ„ scriptorumque vehementer poenitet c. Bull. Retract ut supra I am ashamed of my error I earnestly repent both of my words and deeds and I say Lord remember not the faults and ignorance of my youth And thus being Pope saving all advantages to his See he hath condemned him selfe and his Writings as published by him when he was a private man and yet notwithstanding the Inquisitors professe hee hath retracted that as Pope which afterwards hee condemned and therefore by their doome hee must have a new purgation and from thenceforth Tum Pius Aeneas But tell mee I pray was hee Pius Aeneas when he complained that at Rome the c Nam ipsae manus impositiones Spiritus sancti dona venduntur Aene. Sylv. Ep. 66. imposition of hands and the gifts of the Holy Ghost were sold for money Was hee Pius Aeneas when he complained that the Court of d Quid est Romana curia his qui summam tenent nisi turpissimum pelagus ventis undique durissimis reÌ„pestatibus agitatuÌ„ Idem Ep. 188. Rome in the chief amongst them was but a most filthy Sea tossed on every side with winds and strong tempests Was hee Pius Aeneas when he protested with griefe that e Jacet spreta religio justitiae nullus honos fides penè incognita Ep. 398. religion was despised righteousnesse dishonoured faith in a manner unknowne Or was hee Pius
contrarie hee recants it saying a Bel. Recognit de summo Pont. p. 16. I allow not that which I said with Albertus Pighius that Paul appealed to Caesar to be his lawfull Judge Againe whereas it was said the Popes used to be chosen by Emperours the word Emperor potest fortè debet deleri b Idem de Cler. p. mihi 52. it must and peradventure ought to be blotted out And when I sayd that Paul was subject to Caesar as to his temporall Lord I meant it was so c De facto non de jure Ib. p. 17. Sapendo M. Paolo chasotto Sisto Quinto usci un Indice de libri prohibiti il quale se ben subito si occulto non fu pero cio cosi presto fatto che non ne restassero gli essemplari Et in questo erano compresse le opere del Bellarmino In lib. Confirmatione del considerationi del M. Paulo di Venetia di M. Fulgentio Brestiano servita In Venetia appresso Ruber to Mejetti 1606. Con licentia de superiori in 4 to in fact but not of right And in truth it seemes that neither the Pope nor his Inquisitors were well pleased with this Catholike doctrine For Frier Paul of Venice acknowledged Cardinall Ballarmine and Baronius for learned men and further saith that he hath knowne the one and the other in Rome but he could wish withall that they had written that which they sincerely thought without being forced to recant any thing that they had spoken For Frier Paul knew well that under Sixtus Quintus there came out an Index of prohibited Bookes which though it were suddainly stayed and called in yet it was not so closely acted but that there remained Copies of it and in that Index the workes of Bellarmine were comprehended If this learned Cardinals Booke had beene forbidden you and your fellowes would have beene to seeke of an answere for many objections made against you for it is usuall with you to referre me for an answer to Bellarmine But as it is observed they recanted many things in their writings Dum plurima Annalibus digerendis pervolutanda fuere agnovit ingenuè quae primis editionibus autmāca aut non omnino ad plenam veritatem abs se fuerāt scripta id quod in Annalibus non semel testatus est For Baronius confesseth that in his first Editions many things were imperfect and not altogether true which were corrected in the other impressions And I am perswaded ere long wee shall have an Index a Defēsio Johānis Marsilii in favorem respōsi 8. propositiones continentis adversus quod scripsit illustrissimus Cardinalis Bellarminus Venetiis 1606. Expurgatorius lay hold on him For saith Johannes Marsilius I have heard that as he hath taken a liberty to mend the Fathers Canons and Historians so he will correct the Councels after his manner and for his owne purpose and so assume unto himselfe a licence hereunto which God forbid Againe saith he b Marsil p. 357. See B. Mortons encounter against M. Parsons reckoning l. 1. c. 1. p. 10 11 the Answers of Cardinall Baronius are not unlike the answers of Cardinall Bellarmine who whilst he cannot finde an objected argument to be assoiled by Historie he saith that those words have beene inserted into the Bookes much like to Mr. Floyd when there is no answere to be made to some particular objections out of the Authors you reject them all as condemned by your Inquisitors And this answere I am sure may serve for all objections that can bee made from most Classicall Authors The last thing which I here meane to speake of is a certaine distinction of explicite and implicite faith which the Knight and his Ministers cry out against and are pleased sometimes to make themselves merry withall as if they would laugh out but it is too well and solidly grounded to bee blowne away with the breath of any such ministeriall Knight as he is Thus you You professed formerly to teach mee for my learning now it seemes you would instruct me for my manners you tell me I make my selfe merrie with your doctrine as if I would laugh out truly I am sorry to thinke you teach such ridiculous doctrine as should deservedly cause laughter Shall I make you my Confessor I cannot chuse but smile when I consider what great paines you have taken in this whole Chapter to uphold the Articles of your Faith with sixe pretended rules and all infallible as namely Scripture in the plaine and literall sense Tradition or common beliefe and practice of the whole Church Councels either generall or particular confirmed by the See Apostolike the authoritie of that whole See it selfe defining Ex Cathedra though without either generall or particular Councell the common and uniforme consent of ancient Fathers or moderne Doctours and Schoole-men delivering any thing unto us as matter of Faith All these sixe rules say you we acknowledge and are ready to make good whatsoever is taught any of these wayes When I say you assume confidently that all these are infallible rules to leade men to the knowledge of your Faith and at last you conclude and as it were shut up all those rules of knowledge with the doctrine of an implicite faith This I confesse is such a mystery of foolishnesse as deserveth rather laughter than an answer For as Cato said He marvelled that a Soothsayer did not laugh when he saw a Soothsayer So I am verily perswaded that your selves doe smile when you meet each other to thinke how you cousen the poore ignorant people with a blind obedience and an implicite Faith To let passe your Golden Legends and leaden miracles which occasion sufficient mirth in long winter nights for all sorts of people what I pray is that implicite Faith that you condemne me and our Ministers for laughing at Mistake us not I know no Protestant doth laugh at an implicite Faith which is directed to the proper object the holy Scripture we laugh not at an implicite Faith which cannot be well unfolded or comprehended by reason as namely the unsearchable mysterie of the Trinitie of Christs conception by the holy Ghost and the like but we disclaime and condemne your Catholike Colliers Faith which is canonized for your Popish Creed that is to pin our Faith upon the Churches sleeve and to assent to every thing the Church propoundeth to be beleeved without examination whether it be agreeable to the Scripture or besides it We laugh or rather wee pitie that Merchant of Placentia who chose rather to bee a Papist than a Protestant Laurent Discept Theolog. p. 5. because saith he I can briefly learne the Roman faith For if I say what the Pope saith and deny what the Pope denyes and if he speake and I hearken unto him this is alone sufficient for me And wee cannot choose but smile at the judgement pronounced by your Gregorie de Valentia upon this poore ignorant
beyond exception who spake as it were prophetically of the Church of Rome in her most flourishing state St. Hierome writing to Marcella a noble Lady exhorteth her to depart from Rome which he compares to Babylon Hier. ad Marcel Ep. 17. Tō 1. p. mihi 156. Reade saith he the Revelation of St. John and consider that which is there said of the woman clothed in purple of the blasphemy written in her forehead of the seven Mountaines of the great waters of the fall of Babylon Goe out from thence my people Babylon is falne and is become the habitation of Divels and the hold and cage of every foule spirit Now that wee might understand this was not spoken by him of heathen Rome he adjoyneth these words following Est quidem ibi sancta Ecclesia There is a true or holy Church there are the Trophies of the Saints and Martyrs there is the true confession of Christ published by the Apostle Ludovicus Vives your very friend in commenting upon this place tells us that St. Hierome thinketh there is no other Babylon described by St. John in the Revelation than the City of Rome But now saith he it hath put off the name of Babylon Lud. Vives in August de Civ Dei l. 18. c. 22. there is no confusion now you cannot buy any thing now in matter of Religion without a faire pretence of holy Law for selling it yet may you buy or sell almost any kinde of cause holy or hellish for money In D. August Annot. Ludov. Vives prohibentur nisi corrigantur Ind. l. prohibit Class 2. For this and the like passages your Vives is forbidden till hee be purged I must confesse I doe not thinke that the Rhemists would have interpreted Babylon for Rome if it had not beene to prove Peters being at Rome It is happy therefore for you that Peter wrote his Epistle from Babylon for otherwise your succession from Peter had beene questioned and it is as well for us that you are contented to allow Babylon for Rome for by this meanes your Antichristian Doctrine is discovered and your succession of Peters faith is quite abolished But say you if you meane as you expresse your selfe that a true Church may bee depraved I know not what to say but to stop my eares against that mouth of blasphemie And is it blasphemie to say a true Church may be depraved Sure I am it is not blasphemie against the holy Ghost for the mouth of St. Paul hath spoken it in parricular to the Roman Church even at that time when she was a most incorrupt Church Towards thee goodnes Rom. 11.22 if thou continue in his goodnesse otherwise thou also shalt be cut off And may not a Church thinke you be depraved that is in possibility of being cut off What thinke you of the Church of Hierusalem Psalm 48.19 Did not the Prophet David terme it the City of God and was it not afterwards termed a Harlot by the Prophet Esay What say you to the Temple of Solomon was it not termed by him 1 Kings 8.20 the house of Prayer and in Christs time was not that house of Prayer become a denne of Theeves Mat. 21.14 He that sayes Antichrist shall sit in the Temple of God doth plainely intimate that the true Church may be depraved and that before his comming there was a true Church In his answer to Card. Peron p. 9. Eng. What Babylon is saith learned Casaubon thus much the matter it selfe doth plainly shew that whether some private Church be understood in that place by the name of Babylon or the greater part of the whole it was before this a true Church with which the religious might religiously communicate but after it was more depraved the religious are commanded to goe out and to breake off communion with her And as touching the authority you cite that he would be with them to the worlds end that the Church is built upon a Rocke that the gates of Hell should not prevaile against it these promises I say concerne no more the particular Roman Church than the seven Churches of Asia that are falne away The blasphemie then you lay to my charge if any such be is but against your Roman Church and of such blasphemie many of your best learned are guilty in acknowledging a depravation of their faith notwithstanding all the promises of Christ to the Catholicke and universall Church Your Bishop of Bitonto by way of prevention cryes aloud in your Councell of Trent Cornel. in Concil Trident. Would to God they were not wholly with generall consent gone from religion to superstition from faith to infidelitie from Christ to Antichrist I could bring you a world of complaints against the falling away and depravation of your Roman Faith but that your eares will not endure such blasphemie Howsoever since your best learned have acknowledged Babylon to bee meant by Rome and that Rome is falne from her first faith Jerem. 51.6.9 I say with the Prophet Jeremie Fly out of the midst of Babylon and deliver every man his soule we would have healed Babylon but she is not healed forsake her and let us goe everie one into his owne Country for her judgement reacheth unto Heaven and is lifted up even unto the skies CHAP. III. The summe of his Answer to my second and third Sections IN the second Section he saith I labour to prove the contention betwixt the Churches to proceed originally from them The third Section is to prove the corruption both in faith and manners Both which are easily answered First by asking what is this to the purpose for the visible Church Secondly with the contradiction of a former lye he telleth a new one for the Reformation was sought for manners onely and not for doctrine This is the substance of your third Chapter in answer to my second and third Sections The Reply You have answered two Sections almost in two words the first in denying it to be to the purpose the latter in giving me the lye And thus like another Caesar you have briefly expressed the expedition of your victory in few words Veni vidi vici I came I saw I overcame First you demand what is this to the purpose of a visible Church But I rather wonder to what purpose you make such a demand For my Booke is entitled The Safe Way not the visibility of the Church Yet let me tell you the Authors which I cite are for the most part members of your Church and their authorities tend much to the proofe of a visible Church if your Index Expurgatorius did not spunge them and cause their testimonies to be often invisible For instance in our behalfe I cite Cassander To Cassander you answer he is like your selfe an Hereticke or next doore to them and yet elsewhere you say with much adoe he may passe for a Catholike Pag. 21. Oportet esse memorem I cite Cecenas Generall of the
marriage were restored to Priests yea whilst he was a Cardinall he had his concubine to whom at last he gave threescore Florens for her Dowrie and it seemes when he was well in yeares in or about the time of his Popedome he confessed I cannot boast of any merit in my chastity Magis me Venus Jugitat quam ego illā horreo Ep. 92. for to tell the truth venerie doth rather flie from me than I from it Neither was it his particular case alone for the Booke called Taxae Camerae Apostolicae which your Bishop Espencaeus complained of doth sufficiently witnesse the damnable effects of such divellish doctrine The gravest Cardinals in Rome who were appointed by speciall Commission and presented their information to Pope Paul the third doe sufficiently witnesse the forbidden fruits of such an evill tree The words are these In this City of Rome the Curtezans passe through the streets Wolph Lect. Memor Anno 1535 p. 403. or ride on their mules like honest Matrons and in the midst of the day Noblemen and Cardinals deare friends attend upon them We never saw such corruption but onely in this Citie which is the example and patterne of all other moreover they dwell in faire and goodly houses On the other side you would make us beleeve that your Curtezans goe altogether on foote that they have a speciall badge of dishonestie whereby they may be knowne that they are despised and reviled of the people but especially by Cardinals and the Nobles that they dwelt in out-houses and back lanes but to ride on horsebacke to be attyred as honest Matrons and Noble Ladies to be attended by Priests and Cardinals friends and to dwell in faire and beautifull houses this shewes that your dispensation for stewes is occasioned chiefly by the forbidding of marriage and by this meanes marriage which is honourable in all Heb. 13.4 and the bed undesiled by the Apostles doctrine is now become a sinne and your Apostolike See the Mother of Fornications This occasioned your owne Agrippa to complaine of your casting up of the Bawds rents with the revenew of your Church Agrip. de vanit scient c. 64. de Lenonia I have heard saith he the accompts cast up in this sort he hath two Benefices one cure of twenty Ducats a Priorie of forty Ducats and three whores in a brothell house I list not any longer to stirre this filthie puddle Camerinam movere Eras Adag which stinkes in the nosthrils of God and good men the counsell of your Canonist is safe and good in this particular Panor dè Cler. Conjug Cap. Cū Olim. The Church saith he should discharge the part of a good Physitian who when by experience he findes one medicine rather hurt than helpe he removeth it and applieth another and there hee gives the reason Because we finde by experience that the Law of single life hath brought forth contrarie effects and the rather because it is resolved by your learned Cardinall Cajet in quodlibet contra Lutherum It cannot bee proved either by reason nor yet by authority to speake absolutely that a Priest doth sinne in marrying a wife for neither the Order of Priesthood in that it is Order nor the same Order in that it is holy is any hindrance to matrimonie for Priesthood doth not dissolve matrimonie whether it be contracted before Priesthood or afterwards if we setting apart all other Ecclesiasticall Lawes stand onely to those things which we have received of Christ and his Apostles Againe Panorm l. extr de Elect. C. Licet de Vit. Ab. your owne Panormitan tells us that the Priests of Grecia being within Orders doe marrie wives and we see they doe it saith he sine peccato without sinne or breach of Law either of God or man And thus by your owne Tenet you stand with the positive law of man against the law of God you stand in opposition against the Greeke Church which ever used it and lastly you are at difference among your selves Espencaeus de Continentia l. 1. c. 11. p. 116. when many prime members of your owne Church utterly condemne it The doctrine of St. Paul is evident and plaine It is better marrie than burne This Law is cleane perverted by your Jesuits doctrine Utrumque est malum nubere uri imo pejus est nubere quicquid exclamant adver arii praesertim ei qui habet votum solenne Bell. de Monach l. 2. c. 30. Hist of Trent l. 5. fol. 400. 680. for saith Bellarmine Let our adversaries say what they will it is worse to marrie than burne especially for him that hath made a solemne vow So that the Law of God must give way to the Law of man and chiefly for reason of state and policie For saith Cardinall Rodolpho if the marriage of Priests were tolerated this inconvenience would follow the Priests having house wife and children would not depend upon the Pope but on the Prince and their love to their children would make them yeeld to any prejudice of the Church they will seeke also to make their Benefice hereditarie and in a short space the authoritie of the Apostolike See will be confined within the walles of Rome And to these reasons you may truly adde this as appendant to the rest the dispensation of Stewes would be neglected and consequently the great Revenue of the Roman See would be utterly lost and therefore the Index Expurgatorius will not lay hold of any such doctrine For a conclusion of this point If you say marriage of Priests be malum in se evill in it selfe you comply with the Devillish doctrine of Tatianus If it be evill quia prohibetur because it is forbidden onely then fornication which is evill of it selfe and in it selfe must needs bee the greater sinne CHAP. V. The summe of his Answer to my Fifth Section OF this Section saith he there is not much to be said for there is nothing in it but a litle of the Knights own raving Maldonat approveth and commendeth St. Austins explicacation but addeth another of his owne After this the Knight hath a great deale of foolish stuffe which needs no answer The Reply Your answer is short but your words be somewhat sharpe and you can finde nothing in that Section but raving and foolishnesse If it be raving to cite Texts of Scripture against your maimed Commandements your Invocation of Saints your Prayer in an unknowne tongue your worship of Images and the like If it be raving to say Purgatorie is created a point of Faith that Faith is confirmed by Councels meerely for the benefit of the Pope and Clergie that you doe not exercise the power of your Priesthood in binding as well as loosing by reason no man will give monie to be bound but to be loosed in Purgatorie If it be raving to say your Jesuite Maldonat preferres his owne explication of Scripture before St. Austins onely because it more crosseth the
advers Valent. c. 3. and in thrusting himselfe into dark and blinde holes Such is the nature of false teachers they seeke nothing more saith the same Author than to hide that which they preach Idem c. 1. if yet they may be said to preach that they hide But good Physicians say you use to enquire of the causes effects and circumstances Pag. 73. for upon these circumstances dependeth the knowledge whether it be a disease or no. It is most true that Physicians will enquire of the causes of the disease but will they deny the Patient to be sicke or refuse to minister Physicke to him unlesse he tell them precisely how or when he first tooke his disease or infection For this is our case and the point in question touching a reformation Neither doth the knowledge of the disease of the body depend upon the circumstances of time place and person I thinke you never read such Aphorismes either in Gallen or Hyppocrates neither doth your knowledge of errors and heresie in your Church depend on the circumstances of time place and persons For some Authors at the same time and in the same place might have broached truth when another set his heresie abroach as namely Saint Austin precisely in the time and place delivered the Orthodox Doctrine of grace when and where Pelagius spread his heresie From your Rules of Physicke you returne to the Rules of Divinity and tell us from Saint Austin that * Quod universa tenet Ecclesia nec Conciliis institutum sed semper retentum est non nisi authoritate Apostolicâ traditū rectissimè creditur De Baptis contr Donat. l. 5. c 24. in initio Tom. 7. p. mihi 433. whatsoever the Catholike Church doth generally beleeve or practise so as there can be no time assigned when it began it is to be taken for an Apostolicall tradition This place of Austin you neither quoted in your Answer neither have you recited his words faithfully for hee speakes not of assigning the time when the Doctrine begins but whatsoever the universall Church doth hold not being ordained by Councels but hath beene ever held that is most rightly beleeved for an Apostolicall tradition This is his Tenet and this is ours but you have put in the word Catholike in your sense for universall you have added generall beleefe and practise you have thrust in these words so as no time can be assigned when it began and you have omitted the principall verb that hath been ever held which makes me suspect you omitted the citing of this place lest your fraud should be descried But I pardon you let us heare the rest P. 73. But such say you are all those things which you are pleased to call errors If this were as easily proved as spoken you should not neede to put us to the search of times and Authors for the first Founder of your Faith For if your Popish Doctrines were alwayes held by the universall Church and not ordained by Councels we should not need to looke into your Councell of Lateran for your Doctrine of Transubstantiation nor into your Councell of Constance for Communion in both kindes nor into your Councell of Florence for your seven Sacraments nor into your second Councell of Nice for your worship of Images for these and many such traditions were first ordained by Councels and were not the generall beliefe and practice of the Church Againe if the universall Church had alwayes held your Doctrines from the Apostles times why doe you your selfe confesse that your prayer in an unknowne tongue Pag. praecedenti your private Masse your halfe Communion were taught otherwise in the primitive Churches Nay if they be Apostolicall how comes it that they are flat contrary to the Doctrine of the Apostles And thus much of your two rules of Physicke and Divinity let us he are the rest of your authorities Tertullian say you hath this Rule for discerning heresie from truth Tertul. praescrip 31. p. mihi 78. That which goeth before is truth and that which commeth after is errour This Rule is most true but these words you cite by the halves for hee saith expresly Id autem extraneum falsum quod sit posterius immissum Id Dominicum verum quod sit prius traditum That was first delivered which was true and came from the God of truth and this was the Doctrine of Christ and his Apostles for that which commeth after saith he is sarre different where hee shewes likewise in these words following that after Christs time and in the dayes of the Apostles there might be heresies Ut aliquem ex Apostolicis viris qui tamen cum illis persever averint habent authorem Ibid. for the mystery of iniquitie began then to worke and therefore hee will not have it enough to derive a Doctrine from a man which lived with the Apostles unlesse it can be proved that he continued with them and the reason as I conceive was given by Nicephorus After the sacred company of the Apostles was come to an end Niceph. l. 3. c. 16. and that their generation was wholly spent which had heard with their eares the heavenly wisdome of the Sonne of God then that conspiracie of detestable errour through the deceipt of such as delivered strange Doctrine tooke rooting and because that none of the Apostles survived they published boldly with all might possible the doctrine of falshood and impugned the manifest and knowne truth But wee plead say you prescription from the beginning It is not sufficient to plead it you must prove it The Mahometists at this day assume the name of Saracens as your men doe the name of Catholikes as if they came from Sara the free woman Abrahams true and lawfull wife when in truth they tooke their first beginning from Agar the bond-woman neither can there be any prescription against the ancient Records and Evidences of the Word written by Christ and his Apostles Indeed you have found a right and easie way to claime a prescription from the time of the Apostles for you have razed many prime Evidences of the Fathers for the first 800. yeeres which make for our Doctrine and you have proscribed many learned Authors and their Records as I have shewed before for the last 800. yeeres which testified against your errors And now I come to your Churches apostacie or falling from the truth which occasioned these errors Apostacie say you is a defection or forsaking of the Name of Christ and profession of Christianity as all men understand it I shewed in this Section that in the primitive Church when any heresie did arise that indangered the foundation such as was the heresie of the Arrians of the Pelagians and the like the Authors were observed the times were knowne the place was pointed at and forthwith letters of Premonition were sent to all the sound members of the Catholike Church by which publike advertisement the steale-truth
Feasts Images are otherwise now used than they were in the beginning I produced likewise Polydore Virgil Erasmus Scotus Agrippa Cassander Gregorie de Valentia in severall points against your new doctrine now let us heare your severall answers to them Touching Ferus he is a Frier say you in your Bookes but not in ours save onely in the Roman Index of forbidden Bookes Touching Polydore he saith as the Knight telleth us and as much as any Heretike can say but it booteth not for his Booke is forbidden Touching Erasmus he is no Authour for us to answer he is branded in the Roman Index Touching Scotus you neither condemne him nor answer him he tells you plainly that Transubstantiation was not received for a point of Faith till the Councell of Lateran above 1200. yeares after Christ but of this passage Ne gry quidem And yet you might have answered with Bellarmine this opinion of his is no way to be allowed or with Gregorie de Valentia for this saying he ought to be corrected As touching Agrippa and Cassander you will not vouchsafe them an answere but reject them inter damnatos authores as men to be cast out of your Synagogue Lastly touching Gregorie de Valentia you sav his authoritie doth make against the Knight why else should he corrupt and mangle it But whether I or you have corrupted it let the Reader judge my words were these The Communion in one kind when it got first footing in the Church minimè constat it doth not appeare saith Greg de Valentia Youto prove my corruption cite the words in this manner When that custome began in some Churches it appeareth not but that there hath been some use of one kind ever from the beginning I shewed before so Valentia and thus you But in truth this is none of Valentia's own period but one of your owne making who cunningly joyne the latter words which follow in Valentia 4. or 5. lines after to the former with a But which is none of Valentia's the former part of the period is notably mangled by you For thus it stands When that custome began in some Churches Augustana Confessio it appeares not as is acknowledged by the Augustane Confession Now in that Confession the words are these The custome of both kindes remained long in the Church neither doth it appeare when or by what Author it was changed so that he plainly speaketh of the Church in general sheweth the corruption here pretended by M. Floyd to be but a cavill viz. That Valentia saith this not of the Church in generall but of some particular Churches Thus either you blot prohibit all Authors that make forus although they be members of your own Church or else you vouch safethem no answer or else you quarrell without any just occasion offred and this wil prove an easie way for the weakest scholar in your Church to answer all that can be produced against your faith and doctrine Now as the Reader hath heard your answer in the generall so let him see your exceptions to the particulars For whereas I said with St. Paul Forbidding of marriage is a doctrine of Devils you answer as if you were angrie with St. Paul that he hath been answered more often than the Knight hath fingers and toes and it seems for that reason you will vouch safe him no answer at all This puts me in minde of the saying of Ludovicus Vives amember of your owne Church who assures us Lud. Vives de Civ Dei l. 13. c. 24. If St. Paul were living in these dayes he would be held either a mad man or an heretike And since you will not resolve me of St. Pauls meaning in that place I will appeale to St. Bernard an Abbot who was restrained from marriage by the law of your Church who speaking of that restraint gives us the true sense and exposition of St. Paul in these words All heresies have an heretike for their founder the Maniches had Manes Bernard in Cant. Serm. 66. the Sabellians had Sabellicus the Arrians had Arrius c. so that we know the Authors of those plagues but by what name will you terme the Author of those that forbid marriage Surely it is not of man or by man and far be it from the spirit-of God but it is foretold by the Apostle St. Paul to be the fraud doctrine of devils But marriage fay you is not a thing evil in it selfe but because it lesse agreeth with the holinesse which is required for the exercise of Priestly function I pray then what thinke you of a concubine Doth companie with her better agree for exercise of your sunction than with a wife Sure I am this is the doctrine of your Church nay more your Pope Siricius would inferre by authoritie of Scripture that martiage is unholy in it selfe for he cites the Text for it They that live in the flesh cannot please God Qui in carne sunt Deoplacere non possunt Now I pray you what difference is there betwixt the ancient heretikes and the members of your Church The Montanists the Tatiani the Eucratitae did not prohibite marriage to all no more than you doe but onely to their perfecti as being a disparagement to their perfect estate or as you interpret not agreeing to the holines of Priesthood Again whereas I proved out of Polydore that the marriage of Priests was not altogether forbidden till the time of Gregorie the 7. that is to say above a thousand yeares after Christ you answer that which Polydore cites is most evidently false as appeareth particularly by a Canon of the first Councell of Nice and the second Councell of Carthage Now if Polydore were mistaken it concernes not me for I cited him truly and he is a member of your Church but the truth is you are much mistaken touching those two Councels Sozom. l. 1. c. 22. For the Councell of Nice saith Sozomen commended Paphnutius judgement and touching this matter of mariage made to decree an all but left it to each mans owne will without any force of necessity And the Councell of Carthage forbiddeth not marriage in Priests but commandeth abstinence from marriage rites for a certaine time as St. Paul doth that they may more freely give themselves to prayer and the offices of their sacred function Which plainly shewes that both Priests were married in those dayes and consequently that those two Councels make flatly against you But Marius say you cannot find the beginning of this prohibition Polydore findeth it and yet both make for the Knights purpose And without doubt they doe for they contradict not one the other Polydore speaketh of publike absolute and reall prohibition Marius of the first condemning it in any Priest and these confessions may well stand together CHAP. VII The summe of his Answer to Sect. 7. 1. That the imputations of ancient Haeresies are false 2. That Succession besides Antiquity importeth continuance and perpetuity
so false and so apparently false as that it is not to be doubted but hee that shall averre it will make no soruple of any lie how lewd soever Thus you Good words and found proofes would better become men of your profession If you affirme that you have a Lineall Succession the proofe lyes on your side and when I shall see it as plainly proved as spoken I shall readily confesse my error till then let me tell you it is not your Catalogue of Popes which you say are sold and printed at London that can make a firme agreement of succession in Faith For by that reason our Queene Elizabeth of blessed memorie succeeded Queene Mary in Faith and consequently our Faith must be good by your owne confession By that reason Ahaz and Manasses that shut up the doore of the Temple succeeded David in the Faith By that reason Pope Liberius the Arrian succeeded Iulius a Catholike Bishop in the Faith By that reason your Cardinall Poole succeeded Bishop Cranmer our Protestant Martyr in the Faith This most firme Argument therefore as you call it is but weake and infirme and accordingly it was resolved by Saint Ambrose and the ancient Fathers Ambr. de Poenit. cap. They have not the succession of Peter that want the faith of Peter In fine if for no other cause yet for this alone your succession in Faith is interrupted because you your selfe confesse that some Articles which are received as points of Faith in your Church are different from those which were received in the Primitive Churches and therefore want succession in the true doctrine And that you may yet farther know there was an interruption of the true Faith in succeeding Ages Genebr Chrone lib. 4. your owne Genebrard confesseth that there were fifty Popes succeeding one another rather Apostaticall than Apostolicall Cardinall Bellarmine in his Chronologie tels us of six and twentie Schismes in the Papacie wherein it was questionable betwixt the Popes and Antipopes who were the true successors of Peter Your Cardinall Baronius tels us that base Harlots beare all the sway at Rome Baron An. 912. and gave Bishopricks at their pleasures and intruded their Paramours into Peters chaire false Popes whose names are written in the Catalogue of Popes onely to note and designe the times It is not then your Catalogue of Popes which you so much brag of that can free you from Heresie or make good your succession in the Faith and therefore I will conclude as I first began The pedigree of the Romish Faith is drawne downe from the ancient Heretikes and the Protestant Faith from Christ and his Apostles CHAP. VIII The summe of his Answer to Sect. 8. 1. That I allege but three Authors Adrian Coster and Harding and them falsly or impertinently for three severall points of the Protestant Faith none for the universality of it in generall as the title promiseth 2. That it is not sufficient to name some in the Roman Church who held some of our opinions but that I must shew a distinct companie from the Roman making a Church 3. That it is not to purpose to shew the Antiquitie and Vniversality of those points wherin we agree with you but in those other points wherein wee disagree 4. That if it were granted the Protestant Church in former ages lay hid in the bosome of the Roman Church that proveth it to have been invisible rather than visible The Reply IN the eighth Section I assumed to prove the Antiquitie and Vniversalitie of our Religion by and with the consenting testimonies of the Romane Church you tell mee It is a bold and unlikely adventure and it is shamelesse and impudent These words be like a house full of smoake without fire but what is the occasion of all this heinous complaint Forsooth the Knight bringeth not one Author I say not one for the Vniversalitie and Antiquitie of his Church And is this so grievous an accusation Surely I thought there was none so ignorant or impudent as to denie both the Vniversalitie and Antiquitie of three Creeds two Sacraments instituted by Christ the two and twentie books of Canonicall Scriptures of the first foure Generall Councels of the Apostolike Traditions of the Ancient Liturgies of the Ordination of Priests and Deacons These are our Tenets and these were the particular Instances which I made and to bring Authors for the proofe of these as if we made a doubt of that which all true Christians did generally receive and beleeve I say with St. Austin Insolentissimae dementiae Aug. It were a signe of most insolent madnesse But admit I should produce some Authors for proofe of this generall beleefe would their Authoritie free me from your termes of Shamelesse and impudent adventure Certainly no for say you If hee should have one two or three or ten men it would not be sufficient for him unlesse hee have the Authoritie of the Catholike Church or Church of Rome To cite many Authors or to bring none then is all alike to you for in your doome nothing will free mee from the name and punishment due to Heresie but the authoritie of the Church and yet in this you have granted mee more than I could expect for you have given mee liberty to take my authoritie from the Church so it be from the Catholike or the Roman And hereby you have made your Roman Church distinct from the Catholike which is most true which both you your selfe and most of your fellow Jesuits have made all one and confirmed by the title of Roman Catholike in all your writings This being granted I proceed to the rest of your exceptions In this Section say you he bringeth onely three Catholike Authors Adrian Costerus and Harding but no word for Antiquitie or universalitie Thus you Hee that shall reade my Section in Via tuta with this your Answer must needs confesse that you deale not fairly nor ingeniously with mee for sometimes you leape from the beginning of a Chapter to the end then you returne againe to the beginning being willing to conceale or confound the truth of my Assertions You so mingle my words with your own in the same Character that a prudent Reader can hardly discerne mine from yours but most usuall it is with you to cry down my words with bitter passages and decline the question in all As for Instance in this Section whereas I said the Church of Rome doth confesse the Antiquitie and Vniversalitie of our Religion long before Luther I instanced in our three Creeds and the rest before named One while you cry out of my impudencie that I cite no Authors another while that if I did cite them they would not serve my turne but you never mention either the Creeds or Scriptures or Councels or any of the points which you well knew had Antiquitie and Vniversalitie in the name and opinion of all Christians After that you flie to the later end of my Section and there you tell mee
to grant and therefore addeth for his further answer that Catholique Priests doe imitate S. Paul in the administration of the Sacrament because they are ready to communicate with all such as come worthily to receive Catholique Priests that is in his language Romanists imitate S. Paul in their Masse wherein and how he administred a Sacrament they offer a sacrifice hee prayed in a knowne tongue they in the Latine unknowne to the people he acknowledgeth no Lords supper where there is not a Communion 1 Cor. 10.17 whereby many are made one bread and one body because they all partake of that one bread they say private Masses in which the Priest bids the people eate and drinke but eateth and drinketh all himselfe hee speaketh of breaking of bread they breake none at all hee commandeth every one to examine himselfe and so to eate of that bread and drinke of that cup ver 28. They forbid the Laytie to touch the cup and call they this an imitation of the Apostle is it not rather an immutation and violation of the Apostles holy precepts and practise in these things they tread in the Apostles steps as the Antipodes doe in ours who are therefore so stiled because their feet and steps are diametrally opposite to ours P. 194. Yea but saith Flood there are many things which S. Paul did and wherein he did desire to bee followed as chastening of his body fasting and prayer in which Protestants are not so well able to prove themselves followers of him as Papists can doe I answer that although S. Paul in this place speaketh of no such thing neither can his words reasonably bee stretched to the chastening and beating downe of his body to bring it in subjection because hee addeth as I am of Christ bee ye followers of mee as I am of Christ Now wee reade not that Christ beate his owne body or needed to endeavour to bring it into subjection which was alwayes so from the beginning yet let him rightly understand the Apostles practise in taming his flesh and subduing his body and he will find Protestants as ready to follow him as any the most austere Papist For by taming his body hee meaneth not whipping or scourging which Papists receive by tradition from the heretiques called flagellantes or the whippers nor was his fasting an abstinence from flesh and feeding on the daintiest fish and powring downe the sweetest and strongest wines Act. 28.33 Ye have continued fasting having taken nothing wherfore I pray you to take some meate for this is for your health but an afflicting his body by watching continuall labour and fasting from all kind of sustenance and such fasts not only private Christians among us keepe often but our whole Church in publike calamities by the command of supreame authoritie religiously observeth and hath reaped singular benefits thereby To the third That the precept of S. Paul to tary one for another when they came to eate appertaineth to the Sacrament is evident 1 Cor. 11.20 first by that hee calleth it the Lords supper which they came together to eate when yee come together in one place this is not to cate the Lords Supper Now that by the Lords Supper not the Agape which were not instituted by him but the Sacrament is meant not only S. Austin and S. Cyprian Ep. 118. tract de coen dom and the Fathers generally quoted by Casaubonus Exercit. 16. sect 23. Baron annal tom 1. An. 34. Constat coenam domini sic enim patres appellare consuevere institutionem sacratissimae Eucharistiae Greg. Valent. Tom. 4. disp 6. q. 1. puncto 1. solet vocari hoc sacramentum coena domini sicut appellavit but Baronius and Gregorius de Valentia and the Fathers in the Catechisme of the Councell of Trent expresly affirme Secondly it is evident by the coherence of the Apostles discourse in this chapter who having reproved some abuses in eating the Lords Supper to set an edge upon his reproofe relateth v. 23. sequentibus the institution of the blessed Sacrament and from thence inferreth verse the 33. and 34. wherefore my brethren when you come together to eate tary one for another and if any man hunger let him eate at home that ye come not together to condemnation Yea but saith the Iesuit Apostolus 1 Cor. 11. Chrysostomus hom 1. de coena dom quamsanè appellationem tanquā à veteribus patribus usurpatā commemorat quoque catechismus Romanus Catechis Trid. pat tract de sacram Alt sanctissimi patres Apostolorum authoritatem secuti coenae etiam nomine eucharistiam interdum vocârunt quòd illâ novissimâ coenâ salutari mysterio à Christo domi no sit instituta some among the Corinthians exceeded others and some did want some were drunke and some went away hungrie which could not pertaine to the Sacrament as every one knoweth I grant these abuses could not fall out in the very act of receiving the Sacrament in which every one had but some part of the Consecrated bread and a draught also of the holy Cup in such a small measure and quantitie as they could not bee distempered thereby neither doth the Apostle taxe these abuses at the Lords Supper but in their owne supper which they tooke before v. 21. their disorders in these hee sharply reproves not only as breaches of the Morall law and acts of intemperance but also as prophanation of the Sacrament to which they ought to have come with a holy preparation before Yea but saith the Iesuit the distribution of the Sacrament belonged to the Priests not to the people who are here reprehended for their manner of making their suppers I answer that albeit it appertaineth to the Priests to deliver the sacred elements and the people to receive them from them yet because the Priests cannot give if none bee to take from them the people who either absented themselves from the Communion or came not together but one after another are justly reproved because by this their negligence or disorder the Sacrament could not bee so decently or solemnly celebrated as it ought Now if the Apostle as the Iesuit will have it requireth the people to tary one for another before they began their feasts called Agapae how much more thinke you would hee require this dutie of expecting one the other before they began the Lords Supper which is one of the chiefest and most publike Act and service whereby we professe and expresse the Communion of Saints The neglect of the former dutie in not staying for their guests at their Agapae could bee at the most but a discourtesie or incivilitie but the neglect in the later as the Apostle teacheth trenched upon their conscience and hazarded their salvation wherefore my brethren saith the Apostle v. 33.34 When you come together to eate tarie one for another and if any man hunger let him eate at home that you come not together to condemnation To the fourth The text
properly a Communion but where some people are partakers of the same sacrifice with the Priest And lastly Iohannes Hoffmisterus not only speaketh plainly but cryeth out against your private Masses The thing it selfe doth speake and cry alowd that both in the Greeke and the Latine Church not only the sacrificing Priest but the other Priests and Deacons and the rest of the people or at least some part of the people did communicate together and how this custome ceased it is to bee wondered and wee ought to endeavour that it may bee restored againe in the Church Yea but saith the Iesuit Bellarmine and Durand prove by manifest authoritie that in the Easterne Church in the time of S. Ambrose S. Austine and Chrysostome the people did communicate but once a yeare and yet S. Chrysostome even there where hee complaineth of the peoples coldnesse saith of himselfe that hee celebrated every day though there were none to communicate with him I answer that the publike and solemne time at which all were bound to communicate in the Easterne Church was but once a yeare to wit at Easter yet did the people in those dayes both at other times and especially when they lay on their death-bed receive the Communion which was therefore called Viaticum morientium As for S. Chrysostome 't is true that he much complaineth of the backwardnesse of the people in comming to the Communion and professeth for his owne part that hee neglected not his dutie to celebrate the holy Sacrament though hee were much discouraged therein by the paucitie and raritie of those who presented themselves at the Lords Table yet I find not that he any where saith that he celebrated the Communion when there was none to participate with him For though it may bee at some time especially on the weeke dayes none of the people did communicate with him yet alwayes some of the Clergie who assisted that action communicated with him and therefore the Iesuits inference that by our doctrine the Priest must not say Masse once in seven yeares unlesse the people bee so devout as to receive with him is most absurd For in all Colledges and Cathedrall Churches the Priests and Deacons communicate every moneth at the least though none of the people sometimes receive with them But in parish Churches it were a prophanation and a meere mockerie to administer the Communion without some of the people to say Take eate and drinke you all of this when there is none to eate or drinke but the Priest himselfe none I say neither Layk nor Clergie man To the sixt The Canon of the Councell of Nants is mounted against solitarie Masses and what are solitarie Masses but private Masses the Fathers in that Councell account it a ridiculous superstition in a Priest to say the Lord bee with you and lift up your hearts and wee give thankes unto the Lord or let us pray when there is none to make answer Concil Nan. c. 30. Cassand p. 83. or present whom hee inviteth to pray with him and is it not altogether as absurd and ridiculous for the Priest to say as hee doth in all private Masses Take eate De myster missae c. 15. piè credendum est quòd Angeli dei comites assistant orantibus and drinke yee all of this when there is none to eate or drinke with him Neither will Innocentius evasion serve the turne that wee are piously to beleeve that though there are no men present yet that the Angels accompanie them that pray for neither can the Angels joyne in such formes of prayer as are used looke upon our infirmities and deliver us from fornication and other deadly sinnes neither is it agreeable to sound Divinitie or Philosophie to bid Angels that are spirits receive the body and bloud of our Saviour Here for want of better answer the Iesuit picketh a quarrell with the Knight for not citing the Councell of Nants out of any originall but out of Cassander Flood p. 197. beyond whom and one or two more such fellowes saith he it seemeth his learning did not stretch I will repay him in his owne coyne For the Iesuit himselfe citeth not the Councell of Nants out of any originall but out of Bellarmine and Burchard beyond whom P. 197 l. 27. and one or two more such fellowes it seemeth his learning did not stretch Is it no disparagement for Flood a professor in Divinitie and writer of Controversies to cite a Canon of a Councell out of Bellarmine his fellow-Iesuit and is it a disparagement for a Knight no professed Divine to cite a Canon of a Councell out of Cassander a most learned Doctour and great Antiquarie in high esteeme when hee lived in the Roman Church If the Iesuit answer that hee could not cite the originall because that Decree is not now extant in any Councell of Nants that wee have with one and the same answer hee justifieth the Knight as well as himselfe It is no argument of Ignorance but rather of faithfulnesse and sinceritie when a man cannot come to the sight of a record himselfe to transcribe it out of others verbatim who have seene it and avouch them for it To the seventh The Councell of Trent like Satyrus in the Poet bloweth out of the same mouth hot and cold 3. V. 11. or like the fountaine in S. Iames sendeth forth at the same place sweet water and bitter c. 6. can 8. optaret quidem sacro-sancta synodus ut populus qui astat communicaret quòd hujus sanctissimi sacrificij fructus uberior proveniret for the Councell accurseth them who say private Masses are unlawfull and yet wisheth that there might bee no private Masses It is true that it is one thing to wish that the people would communicate because to heare Masse and receive withall will bee more profitable another to say if there bee none to communicate the Priest must not say Masse or that such Masse is unlawfull yet there is such affinitie betweene these two sayings that a good argument may bee drawne from the one to the other For hee that wisheth a reformation in private Masses or which is all one that of private Masses they were made publike Communions consequently acknowledgeth that private Masses are faultie or defective and if faulty so farre as they are faulty unlawfull And thus the indifferent reader may see that the water of this Flood wants ashes and soap to bee mingled with it lavat enim non perluit for it washeth but scowreth not nor fetcheth out foule staines in the Masse-priests linnen Having refuted his sophismes Loemel spong feles unguentorum fragrantiâ Tigres pulsu tympanorum in rabiens aguntur I come now to retort his Sarcasmes Tigers if they heare a drum grow madde in this section the Knight sounded an alarum and caused the drum to beate hard at the sound whereof the Iesuit his adversarie after the manner of the Tiger groweth starke madde and snappeth at
vpon S. Iohn that out of the side of Christ the Sacraments of the Churchissued he would seeme to answer something First he quarrelleth at the quotation saying I doe not thinke you will find in Chemnitius your good friend S. Ambrose and Bede cited Whereunto I answer that though the Knights good friend Chemnitius cite not Ambrose and Bede yet the Iesuits good friend Card. De Sacram. in gen l. 2. c. 27. Amb. l. 10. in Luc. Bed c. 19. Ioh. intelligunt per sanguinem qui è latere effluxit redemption is pretium per aquam baptismum Bellarmine citeth them both his words are Ambrose in his tenth booke upon S. Luke and Bede in his comment upon the 19. of S. Iohn understand by blood which issued out of our Saviours side the price of our redemption by water Baptisme Next the Iesuit endeavoureth to untwist this triple cord by saying that these three Fathers speake of Sacraments issuing out of Christs side but no way restraine the number to two Whereunto I reply that though the word Sacramenta for the number may bee as well said of seven as two Sacraments yet where S. Austine alludeth to the same text of Scripture and falleth upon the same conceite he restraineth the number to two saying there issued out of Christs side water and blood quae sunt Ecclesiae gemina Sacramenta Now I would faine know of the Iesuit where ever hee read gemina to signifie seven or more then two Were the Dioscuri which are commonly knowne by the name of gemini seven or two only to wit Castor and Pollax As for S. Ambrose and Bede though they say not totidem verbis that the two Sacraments of the Church issued out of Christs side as S. Austine doth yet they can bee understood of no more then two Sacraments for there were but two things which issued out of our Saviours side to wit water and blood whereby they understand Baptisme and the Lords Supper Had there issued out of our Saviours side together with water and blood Chrisme or balsamum or had a rib beene taken from thence the Iesuit might have some colour to draw more Sacraments out of it but now sith the Text saith there issued onely two things water and blood and the Fathers say the Sacraments of the Church are thereby meant it is most apparant that by Sacramenta they meant those two only which they there name in expresse words Baptisme and the price of our redemption that is Christs blood in the Eucharist To the seventh The authoritie of S. Ambrose is as a thorne in the Iesuits eye for it cannot but bee a great prejudice to their cause that so learned a Bishop as S. Ambrose writing six bookes professedly of the Sacraments omitteth the Romish five and spendeth his whole discourse upon our two If the Church in his time beleeved or administred seven Sacraments hee could no way be excused of supine negligence for making no mention at all of the greater part of them it were all one as if a man professing to treate of the elements or the parts of the world which are foure or of the Pleiades or the Septentriones or the Planets which are seven should handle but two of that number Bellarmine therefore and after him Flood pluck hard at this thorne but cannot get it out saying that S. Ambrose his intent was to instruct the Catechumeni only as the title of one of the books sheweth For first S. Ambrose hath no booke of that title viz. An instruction to them who are to bee catechized or are beginners in Christianitie The title of that booke is De ijs qui initiantur of those who are initiated or entred into holy mysteries Secondly this is not the title of any of the six bookes de sacramentis alledged by the Knight but of another tractate Thirdly admit that S. Ambrose as S. Austine and Cyrill wrote to the Catechumeni and intended a Catechisme yet they were to name all the Sacraments unto them as all Divines usually doe in their Catechismes because the Sacraments are alwayes handled among the grounds and principles of Christian religion And though the Catechumeni are not presently admitted unto all yet they are to learne what they are that they may bee the better prepared in due time to receive them Fourthly it is evidently untrue which the Iesuit saith that S. Ambrose writeth not to the beleevers of that age but only to some beginners The very front of his booke proves the Iesuit to bee frontlesse For S. Ambrose his first words are I will begin to speake of the Sacraments which wee have received c. In Christiano enim viro prima est fides for the first thing in a Christian man is faith And as hee writeth to all beleevers not beginners only so hee speaketh also of the chiefe Sacraments of the New Testament and not of those only which the catechumeni received as is apparant out of the fourth chapter of the first booke De sacramentis Wherein hee proveth according to the title of that Chapter Quôd sacramenta Christia norum diviniora sint priora quà m Indaeorum That the Sacraments of the Chrìstians are more ancient and more divine then those of the Iewes and hee instanceth especially in the Sacrament of the Lords Supper Lastly the Iesuit in this answer apparantly contradicteth himselfe first saying that S. Ambrose intent in that Worke was only to instruct the catechumeni in those things that were to be done in the time of Baptisme p. 210. and within a few lines after he saith Bud. deasse Veritas nonnunquam invitis erumpit as fallens inter mendacia ab audientibus demuns agnoscitur cum interim loquentes adbuc se habere in potestate putent that he writeth of the Sacraments whereby they were so initiated which are three Baptisme Confirmation and the Eucharist So true is Budaeus his observation That lyes dash one with the other and truth breakes out of the mouth of the lyar ere hee is aware Who ever heard of the Eucharist to bee administred in the time of Baptisme or that the Eucharist was administred at all to the punies or catechumeni whilest they were such certainly if the catecumeni or younger beginners to whom hee saith S. Ambrose wrote were capable of the doctrine of the Eucharist containing in it the highest mysteries of Christianitie they were much more capable of Penance Matrimonie and Extreame Unction which are easie to bee understood by any novice in Christian religion To the eight That it may appeare what was the judgement of S. Austine in this maine point of difference betweene the Reformed and the Roman Church I will weigh what is brought on both sides first what the Iesuit alledgeth for seven and then what the Knight for two S. Austine having written divers Catechisticall treatises in which hee had occasion to name and handle the Sacraments yet no where defineth the number of them to bee seven
we should heare of your differences among your selves but the fire of contention cannot bee kept within the walls of your Schooles quis enim celaverit ignem Lumine qui semper proditur ipse suo it breaketh out and if ye looke not to it it will set on fire the whole fabrick of your Romish Babel Meane while the Iesuit giveth us great incouragement to desire to bee admitted into the Roman Church because then forsooth wee shall have leave to tread the endlesse mazes of scholasticall disputes To the sixteenth If Soto come short Durand commeth home to the point in question for hee affirmeth that which is alledged by the Knight and confessed by the Iesuit that Matrimonie is not a Sacrament univocally if not univocally not truly and properly but equivocally or analogically Yea but saith the Iesuit all acknowledge it for anerror in Durand hee saith all but hee names none Surely the Divines of the reformed Church acknowledge it for no error in Durand but defend it for a truth and for such Romish Divines that adhere to the Councell of Trent they are but a faction in the Church nor is their authoritie more to be urged against the Doctours of the reformed Churches then the authoritie of the Doctours of the reformed Churches against them which yet if any should produce against any of the Articles of their new Creed they would not vouchsafe them so much as a looke For the definition of the Church in the Councel of Florence which the Iesuit toucheth upon it is of little or no authoritie because that Councell was not general nor called by lawfull authoritie but by the schismaticall Pope Eugenius the fourth who was deposed by a generall Councell held at Basil To the seventeenth Because the Iesuit is forbidden by the Popes law to tast of the fruits of Matrimonie at which it seemes his mouth waters hee is content to let the tree fall to the ground for want of support To Cardinal Cajetan who gave a strong push at it by denying that it can be proved to bee a Sacrament Out of the words of S. Paul Ephesians the fift hee answereth nothing but with ifs if it be not proved out of that place it may be out of others if out of no other yet out of tradition to his ifs I returne fies fie for shame that they should bind all their followers under paine of a heavie curse to beleeve this Sacrament of Matrimonie and yet know not where to ground this their beliefe upon Scripture or tradition If it may be proved to bee a sacrament out of S. Paul Ephes 5. their most learned Cardinal Cajetan is out if it may not be proved out of those words Cardinal Bellarmine and almost all Papists that wrote since Cajetan are in an errour The Iesuit holdeth a Wolfe by the eare hee dares neither hold with Cajetan nor against him but puts the matter off with an iff If it cannot be proved to bee a Sacrament out of that passage as Cajetan affirmeth yet it may bee out of other texts What texts why doth he not name them it is a signe hee feareth his coyne is counterfeit that hee dare not bring it to the test If that place which seemeth to make most for his Romish tenet make nothing at all as the acute Schooleman and most learned Cardinal Cajetan confesseth there is no likelihood that other texts which have lesse appearance will stand them in any stead and therefore for his last refuge he flyeth to unwritten traditions as the old Dunces as I noted before ad pontem asinorum To the eighteenth Canus puts a strong sharpe weapon in our hands to wound your Trent doctrine concerning Matrimonie Canus loc Theol l. 8. c. 5. in materiâ formâ hujus Sacramenti viz. Matrimonij statuendâ adeò sunt inconstantes varij aà eò incerti ambigui ut ineptus juturus sit quis in tantâ illorum varietate discrepantiâ rem aliquam certam constantem exploratam conetur afferre but withall forbiddeth us to strike with it as the Iesuit Flood telleth us as if we were at his beck and might not use our weapons as wee list But let him know though he be so foolish as to give advantage wee will not bee so childish as to leave it If that bee true which he writeth that the Divines of Rome write so uncertainly of the matter and forme of Matrimonie that it were folly in any to goe about to reconcile these differences and determine any thing certaine in the point we will inferre upon him that it is likewise folly to define Matrimonie to be a Sacrament for if the matter and forme of Matrimonie bee so unknowne as hee saith the genus of it must needs be unknowne For the genus as Porphyrie teacheth is taken from the matter L. de praedicab c. de genere and answereth thereunto as the difference is taken from the forme If the genus be uncertaine how can it bee an article of faith that matrimonium is species sacramenti The whole nature of a thing consisteth of matter and forme which if it bee unknowne the specificall essence is unknowne and if the specificall essence be unknowne how can it be ranked in his predicament under its proper genus What Papist soever therefore defineth Matrimonie and putteth it under a Sacrament as the proper genus Canus putteth the foole upon him take it off when you can To the nineteenth Vasquez giveth the Iesuits cause not so light a blow as hee imagineth in saying that where S. Austine calleth Matrimonie a sacrament hee taketh the word Sacrament in a large sense and not in the strict and proper for if S. Austine bee so to be understood he held not Matrimonie a sacrament properly so called but in a large sence onely and if that were his judgement we have a great advantage of our Adversaries in the cause for S. Austine carrieth a great stroake not only because hee is held the acutest of all the ancient Fathers and father of all the Schoolemen but especially because the Pope in the Canon law professeth Augustinum sequimur in disputationibus Wee follow for the most part saith Pope Gelasius S. Ierome in the interpretation of Scripture S. Gregorie in matter of moralitie but S. Austine in point of controversie Yea but saith Flood this is but Vasquez his private and singular opinion concerning S. Austine Neither doth the Knight otherwayes urge it then as the singular opinion of a singularly learned Iesuit enforced by evidence of truth to give over their chiefest hold of antiquitie in this point the authoritie of S. Austine Well be it so saith Flood Vasquez is so farre for you yet we have an Oliver for a Rowland Bellarmine for Vasquez for this opinion of Vasquez is contradicted by other Catholique Divines and by Bellarmine in particular Where is then the unitie our Adversaries so much bragge of two of the greatest Champions of the Pope Vasquez and
same prayers are said breeds no deformitie at all but uniformitie rather Sith it is not the different sound of words but of sense that makes a difference either in the beliefe or practice of the Church There was never more unitie then in the Apostles time Acts 2.46 when all the be leevers were of one mind yet then they praised God in divers languages Acts 2.9 Parthians and Medes and Elamites and the dwellers in Mesopotamia and in Indaea and Cappadocia in Pontus and Asia Phrygia and Pamphylia in Egypt and the parts of Lybia about Cyrene and strangers of Rome Iewes and Proselites Creets and Arabians wee doe heare them speake in our tongues the wonderfull workes of God To the fourth The diversitie of translations either of the Scriptures or the Church office breedeth no inconvenience at all provided care betaken that the translations bee revised by the learned and licenced by authoritie nay on the contrarie the Church reapeth much benefit by it for languages have beene therby improved and the Scriptures much opened For oftentimes that which is obscure in the originall is cleared in a good translation An unknowne tongue is like a vaile before a beautifull picture or a filme before the eye which by a good translation is taken a-away If it were either unlawfull or inconvenient to translate the holy Scriptures or choyce parts of them in the Church Liturgie into vulgar languages why did Severus translate them into the Syrian S. Ierome into the Dalmatian S. Chrysostome into the Armenian Vlphila into the Gothian Methodius into the Slavonian Bede into the British and the Divines of Doway and Rhemes of late into the English Aeneas Sylbist Bohem. c. 30. Nay why did the Pope himselfe signe and subscribe unto the Petition of Cyrill and Methodius Monkes sent to convert the flaves and Dalmatians who in behalfe of their Converts desired of his holinesse that he would give leave to say service unto them in the Slavonian tongue which the Pope consented unto upon their much pressing him with that text of holy Scripture Ps 150. v. ult Let every thing that hath breath praise the Lord and let every tongue confesse unto him To the fift If there were any force in the Iesuits reason at all it would prove that neither the Scriptures of the Old Testament should have beene delivered to the Iewes in the Hebrew nor the New Testament to the Greekes in the Greek For Hebrew was then the vulgar tongue of the Iewes and the Greeke to the Gentiles yet wee find that neither the writing the Old Testament in the Hebrew nor the New in the Greeke which were then the vulgar languages to those people bred any contempt of sacred things with prophanesse and irreligiousnesse but the cleane contrarie effects The use of Scripture in a vulgar tongue is not the cause why any disesteeme or undervalew it but want of instruction in heavenly mysteries and carelesse and superficiall reading without searching into the bottome of the spirituall meaning where Orient Pearles lie A counrerfeit stone if it bee often handled is discovered to be false and thereby looseth its valew whereas a rich Diamond though it be worne every day on the finger loseth nothing of the price or valew of it If the publike use of Scriptures would have derogated any thing from the worth and valew of it God would never have commanded the children of Israel to rehearse the booke of the Law continually to their children Deut. 6.7 8 9 to talke of it when they tarried in their house and when they walked in the way when they lay downe and when they rose up to bind the words of the law for a signe upon their hand and as frontlets between their eyes to write them upon the posts of the house and upon the gates Worldly wise men seeke to improve their knowledge by concealing it or at least impropriating it to some few but God contrariwise valeweth his wisdome by making it common Earthly commodities the rarer the dearer but heavenly Iewels the more common they are the more pretious of other liquour the lesse wee tast the more we thirst after it but heavenly wisedome thus speaketh of her selfe Hee that drinketh of me the more he drinketh the more hee shall thirst As the comfortable beames of the Sun which shineth daily upon us are not lesse valewed then the raies of those starres that seldome appeare in our horizon so the word of God which is the light of our understanding issuing from the Sunne of righteousnesse loseth nothing of the reverend estimation and religious respect due unto it by the frequent irradiation thereof at the preaching and reading of Scripture nay it gaineth rather with all hearers in whom there is any sparke of grace As for danger of heresie Rain l 1. de Idol indeed Claudius Espenceus writeth that a friend of his in Italie told him that in that countrey they made shie of reading Scripture for feare of being made heretiques thereby but by heretiques hee meaneth such as S. Paul was who after the way which they call heresie worship the God of their Fathers Acts 24.14 beleeving all things which are written in the Law and the Prophets for otherwise if heresie bee taken in the proper sence for erroneous doctrine in point of faith it is as absurd to say that the stequent use of Scriptures is a cause or occasion to bring men into heresie as that the often taking of a sovereigne antidote against poyson is the ready meanes to poyson a man 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Chrys tom 5. Matth. 22.29 S. Chrysostome in his Homilie de Lazaro exhorteth all his Christian hearers to the frequent reading of Scriptures as a speciall meanes to preserve them from errours and heresies For all errours in point of faith arise from the ignorance of Scriptures as our Saviour teacheth the Saduces saying Yee erre not knowing the Scriptures Assuredly there is lesse danger of falling into heresie by reading Scriptures then any other booke whatsoever partly because they alone are free from all possibilitie of errour partly because God promiseth a blessing to those that reade and meditate on them yet our Adversaries suffer all other bookes to bee translated out of the learned Languages into the vulgar only they forbid the translation and publike use of the Scriptures which containe in them most wholsome receipts not only against all the maladies of the will but of the understanding also not onely against all morallvices but also all intellectuall errours in matters of faith which wee call heresies To the sixt Had the Iesuit but an ounce of discretion and common understanding hee would never translate 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to announce which is no English word at all neither is hee of sufficient authoritie to coyne new words at Doway or Saint Omers and make them currant in England For the matter it selfe it is false which hee saith that the Actions at the Lords
Cor. 14. chapter through the whole out of which wee thus argue if it be better in the Church to speake five words with understanding that by our voyce wee may teach others then a thousand words in an unknowne tongue then certainly the publike Service of the Church ought to be in a knowne tongue but it is better in the Church to speake five words with understanding to instruct others thereby then a thousand words in an unknowne tongue v. 19. Therefore the publike Service of the Church ought to bee in a knowne tongue If all things ought to be done in the Church to edification then ought the publike Service to bee in a knowne tongue for hee that speaketh in an unknowne tongue edifieth not v. 5. but in the Church all things ought to bee done to edification v. 26. Ergo the publike Service ought to bee in a knowne tongue If in the prayers of the Church the people are to joyne with the Priest and testifie their consent with him by saying Amen to his prayers and giving of thankes then ought the publike Service to be in a knowne tongue But in the prayers of the Church the people ought to joyne with the Priest and testifie their consent by saying Amen to his prayers and giving of thankes Ergo the publike Service ought to bee in a knowne tongue If in the Church prayers wee ought to pray and sing with understanding then ought Church service to bee in a knowne tongue for if wee pray in an unknowne tongue our spirit prayeth but our understanding is unfruitfull v. 14. But in the prayers of the Church wee ought to pray and sing with understanding v. 15. Ergo the publike Service ought to bee in a knowne tongue Neither can the Iesuit shift off these passages with a wish saying that S. Paul indeed adviseth and wisheth that when any prayer is made in an unknowne tongue there should bee some to interpret but that hee requireth no such thing to bee observed as a divine precept for v. 37. hee addeth if any man thinke himselfe a prophet or spirituall let him know that the things which I write unto you are the commandements of God To conclude when S. Iames commandeth that whosoever prayeth Iames 1.6 aske in faith nothing doubting but that hee shall receive what he asketh hee necessarily implieth that wee ought to pray to God in a knowne tongue For how can hee beleeve that hee shall receive what he prayeth for if he knoweth not what himselfe saith in his prayers or what an other prayeth for him to whose prayers hee saith Amen To the Iesuits second quaere where prayer in an unknowne knowne tongue is forbidden I answer Esay 29.13 and Marke the 7.10 Well Esay prophesied of you hypocrites this people honoureth mee with their lips but their heart is farre from mee and 1 Cor. 14. where the Apostle professedly disputeth against speaking in the Church in an unknowne tongue But the Iesuit excepteth that S. Paul in that chapter condemneth not simply prayers in an unknowne tongue though hee preferreth prophecie By which his ignorant exception it should seeme that hee read that chapter in an unknowne tongue for hee speaketh so wide from the matter as if hee understood never a word in it It is true that the Apostle in that chapter comparing the gift of tongues and prophecie together condemneth neither of them but preferreth the gift of prophecie and in prosecution of the comparison falleth upon those who used the gift of tongues in publike prayers in the Church and hee expresly condemneth that practise of them because they that prayed in such sort uttering words that were not understood spake not to men because no man understood them v. 2. spake into the ayre v. 5. edified not by those prayers v. 12.17 because others could not joyne with them in their prayers nor say Amen to their thankes v. 15. Now if the Apostle reproved the use of the miraculous gift of tongues which redounded so much to the honour of God in the Church without an interpreter v. 28. saying if there bee no interpreter let them keepe silence in the Church How much more may wee conceive would he have sorbidden the use of an unknowne tongue acquired by humane industrie To his third quaere what authoritie we can bring for our selves or example I answer that the Knight hath brought the authoritie and example of the catholique Christian Church for 700. yeares at the least and because he calleth upō us to name any Father who teacheth as we do that the service of the Church ought to bee in a knowne tongue Exposit in psal 18. vult ut quod conamus intelligamus ac humana ratione non quasi avium voce canamus nam psittaci corvi picae hujusmodi volucres saepè abhominibus docentur sonate quod nesciunt sciunter autem cantare naturae hominis divina bonitate concessum est I name S. Chrysostome who in his Commentarie upon the 14. chapter of the first to the Corinthians saith that the Apostle teacheth that we ought to speak with our tongues and withall to minde what is spoken that wee may understand it and S. Austine willeth that wee understand what wee sing like men indued with reason and not chatter like birds for ousels parrats crowes pies and such other birds are often taught by men to sound out that which they know not but to know what they sing or sing with knowledge and understanding is by Gods will peculiarly given unto man I name also Iustine Martyre and S. Basil and many other ancient Doctours whose testimonies are plentifully alledged by Bishop Iewell Article the third and Bilson of Supremacie part the fourth and not yet answered by any Papist to my knowledge To the thirteenth The observation of Cardinall Bellarmine concerning the different custome of the ancient Church and the present Roman maketh rather against the Iesuits then for them For who will not attribute more to the uniforme practise of the primitive Church then to the heteroclyte practise of later Churches assuredly the practise of the primitive Church wherein the people answered the Priests and not the Clarke only is most agreeable to the doctrine of S. Paul and consonant to reason For publike prayers were instituted especially for three ends first for the most solemne worship of God when thousands of hands are at once lifted up to him and as many tongues confesse his name secondly for the stirring up of greater devotion when many hundreds praying and blessing and singing together like so many coales on the same hearth kindle one the other and increase the flame Thirdly for more prevalencie with God when we offer violence as it were to heaven and send up our united devotions like a vollie of shotte to batter the walls of it They who pray in a tongue which the people understand not and therefore cannot joyne with them in their prayer faile of all these ends Yet to sodder
atque depictum habens imaginem quasi Christi vel sancti alicujus non enim satis memini cujus imago fuerit cum ergo hoc vidissem in ecclesiâ Christi contra authoritatem scripturaruÌ„ hominis pendere imaginem scidi illud magis dedi consilium custodibus ejusdem loci ut pauperem mortunm eo obvolverent atque efferrent Ierome in Ezek l. 4. c. 16. nos unam habemus vivam unam veneramur imaginem quae est imago invisibilis omnipotentis Dei. Amphiloc citat à pat concil Constantinop An. 754 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Aug. de mor. Eccl. c. 34 novi multos esse sepulchroruÌ„ picturarum adoratores c. Ep. 109. ad Ian. in primo praecepto prohibetur coli aliqua in figmentis hominum Deisimilitudo non quia non habet imaginem Deus sed quia nulla imago ejus coli debet nisi illa quae hoc est quod ipse L. de fid symb tale simulacrum Deo nefas est Christiano in templo collocare but you must understand that that was joyned to the glory of his God-head in so much that his Apostles could not behold the glory of his flesh in the mount much more glorious is it now having put off mortalitie who is therefore able with dead and livelesse colours and a shadowed picture to expresse those bright and shining beames of so great glorie Epiphanius as zealous as either for entring into a Church at Anablathra and finding there a vaile hanging at the doore died and painted and having the image as it were of Christ or some Saint seeing this that contrary to the authoritie of Scriptures the image of a man was hung upin the Church of Christ he cut it and the vaile and gave counsell to the Keepers of the place to wrap and burie some poore dead man in it and he intreated the Bishop of Ierusalem to give charge hereafter that such vailes as that was being repugnant to Christian religion should not bee hanged up in the Church of Christ S. Ierome in his Comment upon the sixteenth of Ezekiel teacheth that Christians never acknowledge nor worship any image of the invisible and omnipotent God save one to wit his Sonne In the fift age Amphilochius Bishop of Iconium instructeth us what account the Church made of images in these words Wee have no care to figure by colours the bodily visages of Saints in tables because wee have no need of suchthings But by vertue to imitate their conversation and S. Austine treating of the catholique Church professeth that hee knew many worshippers of graves and pictures and withall addeth the Church censure of them but the Church saith hee condemneth them and seeketh every way to correct them as ungracious children and in his 109. Epistle to Ianuarius C. 11. hee writeth that in the first Commandement any similitude of God devised by man is forbidden to bee worshipped not because God hath not an image but because no image of him ought to bee worshipped but that which is the same thing that hee is as for drawing him after the similitude of a man hee utterly disliketh it saying it is unlawfull for a Christian to erect any such image and place it in the Church for as else-where hee argueth images prevaile more to bow downe the unhappy soule in that they have a mouth eyes eares Psal 113. Conc. 2. plus enim valent simulacra ad curvandam infaelicem animam quòd os babent oculos habent aures habent nares habent manus habent pedes habent quam ad corrigenâ—am quòd non loquantur non videant c. God li. 8. tit 12. prohibemus basilicam alicujus imagine obscurari Greg. Regis l. 7 ep 109. ad Seren praetereà judico dudum ad nos pervenisse quòd fraternit as vestra quosdam imaginum adoratores aspiciens easdem ecclefiae imagines confregit atque projecit quidem zelum vos ne quid manufactum adorari possit habuisse laudavimus sed frangere easdem imagines non debuisse judicamus idcirco enim pictura in ecclesia adhibetur ut ' hi qui liter as nesâ—iunt saltem in parietibus videndo legant quae legere in codicibus non valent Vid. Concil Nic. 2. Act. 6. Zonoras hist Tom. 3. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 nostrills hands and feet then to correct it in that they neither heare nor see nor smell nor handle nor walke In the sixt age The Emperour Iustinian setteth downe a law made by Theodosius and Valentinian which forbiddeth Churches to bee obscured with any images or painted tables In the seventh age When Images began to be set up in the Churches Serenus Bishop of Marsilis brake them downe which fact of his though Gregorie disliked because he thought that images might profitably be retained as lay-mens books yet in this hee commended his zeale that hee would by no meanes suffer them to bee worshipped In the seventh age There was a Councell held at Constantinople Anno 754. whereinlt was decreed by 338. Bishops in this manner Wee doe declare that all images of what nature soever made by the wicked art of the Painter be cast out of Christian Churches whosoever from this day forward shall dare to set up any images of God either in the Church or in a private house if hee be a Bishop let him bee deposed if he be a lay-man let him bee accursed Zonoras saith that in the hearing of all the people they openly forbad the worshipping of Images H. de orthodox fid l. 4. c. 17. orat de imag calling such as adored them idolater And in the yeare 794. Charles the great called a Councell of 300. Bishops of France Italie and Germany in which the second Synod of Nice which decreed the erecting and worshipping of images is refuted and condemned yea and some of the patrones of images as namely Durand and Gregorie the second professedly inveigh against all Images and Pictures made to represent the Deity or Trinitie it is unpossible saith Damascene that God who can neither bee seene by man nor circumscribed should be expressed in any shape or figure nay saith hee it is extreame madnesse and impietie to make a representation of the Godhead Ep. Greg. ad Leo. Imper. de imag in and Gregorie the second giveth this reason to Leo the Emperour why they painted not God the Father Quoniam quis sit non novimus because wee know not who hee is and the nature of God cannot be painted and set forth to mans sight In the eighth age Rhem. cont Hinc Laud. c. 20. Hincmarus Archbishop of Rhemes tells us that not long before his time a generall Synod was called in Germanie by Charles the great and therein by the rule of Scriptures and Fathers the Councell of Nice indeed saith he a wicked Councell touching images which some would have to bee broken in pieces and some to bee worshipped was utterly rejected In this age in the yeare
were true might not a man thinke you tell as good a tale of some Protestants who in their pots have made so bold with Almighty God himselfe as to drinke a health to him and were not this a fine argument to prove that there is no God It is intollerable presiemption in the Knight to take upon him to censure so great a Councell as that of Trent Wherein the whole flower of the Catholique Church for learning and sanctity was gathered together the splendour of which Councell was so great that your night owle Heretiques durst not once appeare though they were invited to goe and come freely with all the security they could wish Whoreas the Knight saith that it is a senselesse and weake faith that giveth assent to doctrine as necessary to be believed which wanteth authority out of Scriptures and consent of Fathers I answer he knoweth not what he saith for all the Fathers agree that there are many things which men are bound to believe upon unwritten traditions whose authority you may see in great number in Bellarmine De verbo Dei l. 4. c 7. The consent of Doctours of the Catholique Church cannot more erre in one time then another the authority of the Church and assistance of the Holy Ghost being alwayes the same no lesse in one time then another Tertull. de prescript cap. 28. quod apud multos unum invenitur non est erratū sed traditum and Tertullians rule having still place as well in one age as another that which is the same amongst many is not errour but a tradition St. Paul thought he answered sufficiently for the defence of himselfe and offence of his contentious enemy when he said 1 Cor. 11. If any man seeme to be contentious we have no such custome nor the Churches of God It is false which the Knight againe repeateth that an article of faith cannot be warantable without authority of Scriptures for faith is more ancient then Scripture to say nothing of the times before Christ faith was taught by Christ himselfe without writing as also by the Apostles after him for many yeares without any word written As no lesse credite is to be given to the Apostolicall preaching then writing so no lesse credit is still to be given to their words delivered us by tradition then by their writings the credite and sense of the writings depending upon the same tradition St. Austine defendeth many points of faith De baptisme l. 2 c. 7. l. 5 c. 25. cont Maximin l. 3. c. 3. et Epist 174. de Genesi ad litteram l. 10. c. 23. l. de cura pro mortuis et Epist 118. de unit eccles c. 22. et tract 98. in Iohan. either onely or chiefely by tradition and the practise of the Catholique Church as single Baptisme against the Donatists consubstantiality of the Sonne the divinity of the Holy Ghost and even unbegottennesse of the Father against the Arrians and the Baptisme of children against the Pelagians to say nothing of prayer for the dead observation of the feasts of Easter Ascention Whitsontide and the like Nay this truth was so grounded with him that he accounted it most insolent madnesse to dispute against the common opinion and practise of the Catholique Church In his booke of the unity of the Church he saith that Christ beareth witnesse of his Church and in his Tractates upon John having occasion to handle those words of St. Paul If we or an Angell from Heaven c. wherewith the Knight almost concludeth every Section he thus commenteth upon them the Apostles did not say if any man preach more then yee have received but besides that which you have received for if he should say that he should prejudicate that is goe against himselfe who coveted to come to the Thessalonians that he might supply that which was wanting to their faith but he that supplieth addeth that which was lacking taketh not away that which was before these are the Saints very words in that place by which it is plaine that he taketh the word praeter besides not in that sense as to signifie more then is written as you would understand it but to signifie the same that contra St. Paul himselfe useth the same word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 para besides Rom. 16.17 for contra and you in your owne Bibles translate it so I beseech you brethren marke them which cause divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine which you have learned and avoid them The Hammer AS Erucius the accuser of Roscius Amerinus having little to say against him Cic. pro Rosc Amer. to fill up the time rehearsed a great part of an invective which he had penned in former time against another defendant so the Iesuit here failing in his proofes for indulgences for which little or nothing can be said to fill up the Section transcribeth a discourse of his which he had formerly penned concerning the necessity of unwritten traditions which hath no affinity at all with the title of this Chapter de Indulgentiis In other paragraphs we finde him distracted and raving but in this he turneth Vagrant and therefore I am to follow him with a whip as the law in this case provideth Touching the point it selfe of Indulgences which Rivet fitly termeth Emulgences but the Iesuit the Churches Treasury whosoever relieth upon the superabundant merits and satisfaction of Saints for his absolution for his temporall punishment of sinne after this life shall finde according to the Greeke proverbe 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 instead of treasure Eras Adag Thesauri Carbones glowing coales heaped upon his head in hell For neither are there any merits or superabundant satisfactions of Saints Luk. 17.10 Christ saying when you have done all you are unprofitable servants nor were there any could they be applied or imputed to any other men 2 Cor. 5.10 the Apostle teaching that every man shall receive according to that which himselfe hath done in his body whether it be good or evill 2 Cor. 11.15 nor hath the Pope any more power to dispose of this treasury for the remission of sinnes our Saviour Matth. 18. v. 18. and Iohn 20.23 conferring the same power of remitting sinnes upon all the Apostles which he promised to S. Peter Matth. 16. Neither if the Pope had any speciall power of granting Indulgences could it extend to the soules in Purgatory quia non sunt de foro Papae because they are not subject to the Popes court Serm 2. de defunct 9 9. as Gerson rightly concludeth Neither lastly can it be proved that there is any Purgatory fire for soules after this life St. Iohn expresly affirming that the blood of Christ purgeth us from all our sinnes 1 Iohn 1.7 the fire therefore of Purgatory is rightly termed chymerica and chymica chymericall and chymicall chymericall because a meere fiction and chymicall because by meanes of this fire they extract much gold The Apostle saith there is
the bad Popes To the thirteenth The Knight after Alfonsus quoted Antoninus Cajetan and Bellarmine to prove the noveltie of Indulgences and that there is no ground for them in Scriptures or the writings of the ancient Fathers to whom the Iesuit answereth not a word and here the second time hee is Gravelled in this Section To Alfonsus hee seemeth to say something but upon due examination as good as nothing first hee falsifieth his words saying page 334. that Alfonsus confesseth the use of Indulgences to be most ancient and of many hundred yeares standing whereas his words are not that the use of Indulgences was most ancient but that it was said by some to be most ancient among the Romanes Apud Romanos vetustissimus praedicatur illarum usus this praedicatur is of no more credit than Plinie his fertur or Solinus his aiunt For notwithstanding this report Alfonsus resolves in that very place It seemes that the use of Indulgences came but lately into the Church Secondly the Iesuit forceth a wrong Inference from Alfonsus his words For albeit hee affirmeth that Indulgences are not to be contemned because they have beene in use in the Church for some hundreds of yeares yet hee condemneth not a man for an Haeretique that shall deny them but any one that shall contemne the Church or despise her autority his words are Quoniam ecclesiâ Catholicâ tantae est authoritatis ut qui illam contemnat Haereticus meritò censeatur we say the same also Matth. 18.17 and the Scripture beareth us out in it tell the Church and if he refuse to heare the Church let him be unto thee as a Heathen or a Publican but what if Alphonsus out of feare blowes hot and cold with one breath what 's that to us He lived and died a professed Papist and therefore what he writeth against Protestants is little to be set by but what he writeth against the Church of Rome whom he had a minde to defend in all things and whose feed advocate he was must be thougt to be drawne from him by evidence of truth howsoever let it be noted that Alphonsus calleth not him an Haereticke who denieth Indulgences as the Knight doth Vid. Rain Thes Romana ecclefia nec est Catholica nec sanum membrum Catholicae ecclesie but who contemneth the Catholike Church which neither the Knight nor any Protestant doth we deny not much lesse doe we contemne the authority of the Catholike Church But we deny that the Roman Church is the Catholike or a sound member thereof To the fourteenth Our Ministers doe not like Flood and other Iesuits bring muddy stuffe in their sermons out of Petrus de Voragine and the like fabulous Authors but what they produce in this kinde against the Pope for his base sale of Indulgences and making merchandize of his ghostly power they proove out of good Authors grave Historians Canonists and Schoolemen such as are the author of the lives of Popes and the booke called Taxa camerae Apostolicae Centum granamina together with Wescelius Croningensis Guicciardine Henricus de Gandavo Altisiodorensis If Altisiodorensis words are not plaine enough Summ l. 4. d. relap Dicunt quidam quod relaxatio non valeat quantum ecclesia permittit sed facit ut excitentur fideles ad dandum et decipit eos ecclesia some say that the Popes Indulgence prevailes not so much as the Church promiseth but that thereby men are stirred up to give more freely and that therein the Church deceaveth them what say they to that note in Taxa camerae Apostolicae Nota diligenter quod hujusmodi gratiae non consceduÌ„tur pauperibus quia non sunt nec possunt consolari Matth. par in Hen. 3. Romanorum loculos impregnare note diligently that such favours to wit Indulgences are not graunted to poorâ— folke because they have not wherewithall they cannot be comforted or that pregnant phrase of Matthew Paris that Christs blood alone though it be all sufficient to save soules yet the same without saintly satisfaction applied by the Pope is not sufficient to impregnate his holinesse Coffers If the Iesuit smell not in thâ—se sentences the fat steame of the Popes Kitchin he hath no nose To the fifteenth It is well the Iesuit termeth the drinking of a health to Almighty God a tale and by his quoting no authouâ— or it sheweth that it was a signal lye of his owne inventing when he was betweene hawke and buzzard Never any but himselfe who can blush at nothing affirmed any such thing of any Protestant that ever came to that height of impiety and prophannes as to drinke a health to his Maker Historia Ital. l. 13. Leo nullo temporum et locorum habito delectu per universam orbem amplissima privilegia quibus non modo vinis delictorum veniam consequendi sed defunctorum animus ejus ignis in quo delicta expiari dicuntur paenis eximendi facultatem pollicebatur promulgavit quae quia pecuniae tantum a mortalibus extorquendae gratia concedi notum erat a questoribus huiâ— negotio praefectis impudenter administrabantur magnam plerisque locis indignationem offensionemque concitarant presertim in Germania ubi a multis ex ejus ministris hujusmodi mortuos penis liberandi facultas parvo pretio vendi vel in canponum tabernis aleae subiici cernebantur but Luitprandus and Polonus telleth us of one Iohn the twelfth a Pope of Rome and consequently no Protestant who made so bold with Almighty God as to give Orders in a Stable and so familiar with the Divell as to drinke a health to him As for the Knights prophane jeast as he calleth it it is no jeast but a serious testimony out of a grave historian convincing the Popes agents of Atheisme and prophannes and the Popes themselves of sordid covetousnesse his words are Leo published large privileges through the whole world without any distinction of times and places by which he promised not onely pardon to the living but also power to deliver soules of the dead out of Purgatory paines which because it was knowne that they were granted onely to fill the Popes coffers and because his farmers carried themselves lewdly in the sale of them great offence was taken at them especeally in Germanie where such Indulgences were set at a low price and seene to be staked in Tavernes and Ale-houses at games of Tables To the sixteenth The Trent Synod was not a Councell but a Conventicle wholly swayed by the Italian faction wherein not the flower of the Catholique Church for learning but the bran of the Romish boulted by the Pope was gathered together Let Andreas Dudithius the Bishop of Quinque eccles Ep. ad Maximil who was present at this Councell speake his minde of it the matter came to that passe through the wickednesse of those hungry Bishops that hung upon the Popes sleeve and were created on the suddaine by the Pope for
to which we owe absolute consent and beliefe Vid. August supr cit without any question or contradiction To the two and twentieth Saint Austine defends no point of Faith against Heretikes either onely or chiefly by the Tradition and practise of the Catholike Church but either onely or chiefly by the Scriptures For example in his booke of Baptisme against the Donatists after hee had debated the point by Scriptures hee mentioneth the custome of the Church and relateth Stephanus his proceeding against such as went about to overthrow the ancient custome of the Catholike Church in that point But hee no where grounds his Doctrine upon that custome though hee doth well approve of it as wee doe Againe in his booke against Maximinus and his 174 Epist to Pascentius hee confirmeth the faith of the Trinity by the written Word against those Heretikes his words Ep. 175 Haec siplacet audire quemadmodum è Scripturis sacris asserantur to the same Pascentius are Here thou maist heare if thou wilt how these points of our Faith are maintained by Scripture So farre is hee from founding those or any other points of faith only or chiefly upon unwritten Traditions What the Iesuit alleageth out of his tenth booke De Genes ad literam cap. 23. Consuetudo matris Ecclesiae in baptizandis parvulis nequaquam spernendus est neque ullo modo superflua deputanda no whit advantageth his cause for there Saint Austine saith no more but The custome of the Church in baptizing Infants is no way to be despised or to be accounted superfluous Wee all say the same and condemne the Pelagians of old and Anabaptists of late who deny Baptisme to be administred to children or any way derogate from the necessitie of that Sacrament The Iesuit saith hee will say nothing of Prayer for the dead yet hee quoteth Saint Austine de curâ pro mortuis as if in that booke hee taught Prayer for the dead and grounded it upon unwritten Tradition Whereas in that booke hee neither maintaineth Prayer for the dead nor maketh mention of any unwritten Tradition for it but on the contrarie solidly out of Scriptures proveth Esaias Propheta dicit Abraham nos nescivit et Israel non cognovit nos si tanti patriarchae quid erga populum ex his procreatur ageretur ignoraverunt quomodo mortui vivorum rebus atque actibus cog noscendis adjuvandisque miscentur et paulo post ibi ergo sunt spiritus defunctorum ubi non vident quecunque aguntur aut eveniunt in istâ vitâ hominibus Ep. 118. Si quid hocum sic faciendum divinae Scripturae praescribat authoritas non est dubitandum quin ita facere debeamus similiter si quid per orbem tota frequentat Ecclesia that the Saints departed have no knowledge of our affaires upon earth the Prophet Esay saith Abraham knoweth us not and Israel is ignorant of us If so great Patriarchs knew not what befell their posteritie after their death how can it be defended that the dead intermeddle with the actions or affaires of the living to helpe them onward or so much as to take notice of them A little after he concludes flat upon the Negative The Spirits therefore of the dead there remaine where they knowe not what befalleth to men in this life To what end therefore should wee call upon them in our troubles and distresse here Neither hath this Father any thing in his 118 Epistle for the Iesuit or against us for there hee speaketh of Ecclesiasticall Rites and Customes as appeares in the very title of that Epistle not of Doctrines of Faith and yet even in these hee giveth a preheminence to the Scriptures If saith hee the authoritie of divine Scripture prescribe any Rite or Custome to be kept there is no question to be made of such a Rite or Custome and in like manner if the whole Church throughout the world constantly useth such a Rite or Custome The Iesuites next allegation out of this Fathers booke De unitate Eccles cap. 22. falleth short of his marke hee saith there that Christ beareth witnesse to his Church that it should be Catholike that is spread over the face of the Earth and not to be confined to any certaine place as the Province of Affrica Wee say the same and adde that the bounds of it are no more the territories of the Bishop of Rome than the Provinces of Affrica Wee grant that Whosoever refuseth to follow the practise of the Church to wit the Catholike or universall Church resisteth or goeth against our Saviour who promised by his spirit to leade her into all truth and to be with her to the end of the World Which promise may yet stand good and firme though any particular Church erre in Faith or manners as did the Churches of Asia planted by the Apostles themselves and the Church of Rome doth at this day Cont. lit Petil. l. 3. c. 6. Now because that testimonie of Saint Austine wherewith the Knight concludes almost every Section If wee or an Angell from heaven preach unto you any thing whether it be of Christ or of his Church or any thing which concerneth Faith or manners besides that which you have received in the Legall and Evangelicall Scriptures let him be accursed is as a beame in all Papists eyes therefore they use all possible meanes to take it out but all in vaine for the words of the Apostle on which Saint Paul commenteth are not as the Iesuit would have them If any man preach unto you Contra against but if any preach unto you Praeter besides Ep. ad Galat. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Neque enim inquit si contraria solum predicaverint intulit anathema esto sed si evangelizaverint preter id quod ipsi evangelisavimus hoc est si plusculum quidpiam adjecerent as Saint Chrysostome and Theophylact accutely observe The Apostle saith not if Chrysostome rightly understand him if they should preach any thing contrary but if they shall in their preaching adde any thing be it never so little besides that which wee have preached unto you let him be accursed And Theophylact is altogether as plaine as Chrysostome in his Glosse upon the words The Apostle inferreth not if any man preach contrarie to that yee have received but if any preach besides that which wee have preached unto you that is if they shall presume to adde any thing though never so little let them be accursed Neither doth Saint Austine in his tractate upon Saint Iohn upon which Bellarmine and after him Flood so much beare themselves any whit contradict the former interpretations of Saint Chrysostome and Theophylact. For his words in that place carry this sense The Apostle saith not if any man preach more unto you than you have already received that is perfectly conceived and apprehended for then hee should goe against himselfe who saith that hee desired to come to the Thessalonians to supply
that which was lacking to their Faith to supply I say that which was lacking to their Faith not to the Gospell which Saint Paul preached hee saith not let him be accursed who further informeth you in the Doctrine of the Scriptures or delivereth you more out of them than yee have yet received within that Rule but hee that delivereth you any thing besides that Rule And that this is his meaning appeareth by the words immediately following which the Iesuit cunningly suppresseth to wit these Qui praetergreditur regulam fidei non accedit in viâ sed recedit de viâ Hee that goeth besides the Rule of Faith doth not goe on in the way but departeth out of the way Yea but the word in the Greeke translation 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 here used is the same with that Rom. 16.17 which wee in our Bibles translate against not Praeter besides Yea but the Jesuits in their owne Latine vulgar translation to which they are all sworne as wee are not to ours render this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Praeter besides and not Contra against and that this translation is most agreeable to the Apostles meaning appeareth by comparing this text Rom. 16.17 with a parralell'd text 2 Thes 3.6 Withdraw your selves from every brother that walketh disorderly and not after the Tradition which you have received of us There is no necessity therefore of expounding 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in that text to the Romans by Contra against wee may as well or better expound it by Praeter that is besides yet if in one place 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 might signifie Contra it doth not follow that it must be so taken Galathians 1.8 for it is well knowne that the naturall and most usuall signification of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Greeke is Praeter besides not Contra against and words are to be taken in their most proper and usuall signification unlesse some necessarie reason drawne from the circumstances of the text or analogie of faith inforceth us to leave it which here it doth not As for Saint Austines judgement in the point it selfe to wit that Scripture is the perfect rule of Faith hee plainely delivereth it both in his 49 tractate upon Iohn and in the ninth chapter of the second booke De doctrinâ christianâ and in the last chapter of his second booke De peccatorum meritis remissione and in his booke De bono viduitatis cap. 11. What words can be more expresse and direct for the sufficiencie of Scripture than those in his 49 tractate upon Iohn The Lord Iesus did Quae saluti credentium sufficere videbuntur In iis quae aperte posita sunt in Scriptura inveniuntur illa omnia quae continent fidem moresque vivendi G. ult Credo etiam hâ—ic divinoruÌ„ eloquioruÌ„ clarissima authoritas esset si homo illud sine dispendio salutis ignorare non posset Sancta Scriptura nostrae doctrinae regulam sixit ne auderemus sapere ultra quam oportet and spake many things which are not written as the Evangelist testifieth but those things were chosen to be written which seemed to suffice for the salvation of Beleevers unlesse those in his second booke De doctrina christiana Among those things which are openly or plainly set downe in Scriptures all things are found which concerne or containe Faith or manners or those in his second booke of the remission of sinnes I beleeve that the authoritie of divine Scriptures would have beene most cleere and evident in this point if a man could not have beene ignorant of it without perill of his salvation or lastly those in his booke in the commendation of Widowhood What should I teach thee more than that which thou readest in the Apostle for the holy Scripture setleth the rule of our Doctrine lest wee should presume to be wise above that wee ought Concerning the infallible certainty of the Protestant faith and the uncertainty of the Romish Spectacles Chapter the 10. a page 346. usque ad 380. THE Knights failing in his proofes of our novelty is a sufficient proofe of our antiquity and his owne novelty The Jesuits may not be ashamed of the oath they take to defend the Papacy nay they may glory in it as an heroicall act whereby they binde themselves to the defence of that authority whereon the weight and frame of the whole Catholike Church and salvation of all soules from Christ his owne time to the very end of the world hath doth and still shall depend Catholike Doctors whom the Knight chargeth with division among themselves may indeede differ in opinion so long as a thing is undefined for so long it is not faith but when it is once defined then they must be silent and concurre all in one because then it is matter of faith The Knight can have no certainty of his Christianity because that dependeth upon his Baptisme or the faith of his parents which he cannot know He can have no certainty of his Marriage or the legitimation of his children because the validity of the contract dependeth upon the intention of the parties which marry and no man can have any certaine knowledge of anothers intention and so the Knight is in no better case then his adversaries in this respect It is cleane a different thing to dispute of the certainty of the Catholique faith which we maintaine and of every mans private and particular beliefe of his owne justification or salvation which we deny to be so certaine the one being grounded upon the authority of Gods divine truth and revelation the other upon humane knowledge or rather conjecture Howscever though we be not certaine by certainty of divine faith that this or that man in particular is truely baptized or ordained a Priest yet we are certaine by the certainty of divine faith that not onely there be such Sacraments but that they are also truly administred in the Catholike Church It might be good and profitable as Bellarmine noteth to invoke the Saints though they themselves should not heare us as the Knight would prove out of Peter Lumbard and Gabriel Biel who though they doubt of the manner yet they doubt not of the thing it selfe Gabriel saith the Saints are invocated not as givers of the good things for which we pray but as intercessours to God the giver of all good And Peter Lumbard saith that our prayers become knowne to the Angells in the word of God which they behold so also doe Saints that stand before God Though it be true which Caietan saith that it cannot be knowne infallibly that the miracles whereon the Church groundeth the Canonization of Saints be true yet it followeth not that we are uncertaine whether the Canonized Saints be in Heaven or no because the certainty of Canonization dependeth upon more certaine ground to wit the authority of the See Apostolique and continuall assistance and direction of the Holy-ghost the spirit of truth to whom it belongeth not to suffer Christs
Vicar using humane diligence and proceeding prudently in a matter of that moment Ep. 68. vivebant ut latrones honoraebantur ut martyres to erre and whereas St. Austine saith that many were tormented with the Devill in Hell who were worshipped by men on earth it may be well understood of the Martyrs of the Donatists who were Canonized by those Haeretikes to be Martyrs whose soules were tormented in Hell and whereas Sulpitius and Cassander speake of wicked Robbers and damned persons honoured by the name of Holy Martyrs it followeth not that because some people in St. Martins time did erre in worshiping a dead theefe for a Saint without any approbation of the Church ergo Catholikes may erre in worshiping of Saints Canonized and Authorized by the Church Though Gregorie and other Catholike Divines differ about the place manner punishment and durance of Purgatorie yet none rejecteth the beliefe of Purgatorie it selfe And as for Saint Austine alleaged by the Knight to the contrary his words are to be meant of the finall and eternall place of soules For otherwise Saint Austine is so expresse for Purgatory in the very booke and place quoted by the Knight to wit in his Enchiridian ad Laurentium that Mr. Antonie Alcock a zealous Disciple of Luther as it seemeth translating it into English is faine to write certaine annimadversions upon this Chapter wherein hee confesseth C. 110. Neque negandum est defunctorum animus c. Saint Austines opinion is here for Purgatorie The Saints owne words are Neither is it to be denied that the soules of the dead are relieved by the pietie of their friends living when the sacrifice of our Mediatour is offred for them or almes given in the Church The same Father elswhere saith The whole time betweene the death of a man and the generall resurrection containeth the soules in hidden receptacles as each is worthy either of ease or paine The Doctrine of Catholikes concerning worshipping of Images is not uncertaine it being this onely that Images are to be worshipped but not as Gods For the second Councell of Nice it requireth not onely kissing of Images and a civill kind of imbracing but a prostration on the ground and praying on the knees before them Gregorie de Valentia taketh the word Simulacrum in a good sense and concludeth out of Saint Peter that some Image-worship is lan full not any Idoll worship as the Knight imposeth on him The Hammer IN this Chapter the Iesuit in the fourth fift sixt seventh twelfth fifteene and sixteene Paragraphs doth nothing but seeth againe his old Coleworts which were tasted before and after cast into the dunghill From whence I purpose not to gather them againe or set them before the Reader lest his stomacke should rise at them but I addresse my selfe to examine onely such Sophismes Cavils and Evasions whereby hee indeavoureth to elude or retort the Knights arguments brought against him in this Section in order as I have set them downe To the first The consequence of the Iesuit drawne from the Knights supposed failing in his proofes failes many wayes as may be proved by manifold instances For albeit many later Mathematitians faile in refuting Copernicus his giddy opinion of the earths circular motion and the heavens standing still yet this their failing is no sufficient proofe of Copernicus his new fancie neither will it follow that the religion of Pagans Infidels hath sufficient ground because Lactantius failes in his proofes of Christianitie in Saint Ieromes judgement and Cyprian also in the judgement of Lactantius The defects of the Patron or Advocate ought not to be imputed to the cause It is a weake and silly Religion whose whole strength consisteth in the weakenesse of some of the opposers of it The truth is the Knight hath not failed in his proofes of the noveltie of the Trent Creed as the judicious Reader will find yet if there were any defect in them it may be abundantly supplied out of Iuels challenge at Saint Pauls-Crosse Abbots answer to Bishop intituled The true ancient Roman Catholike and Doctor Faner in his Booke of Antiquitie triumphing over noveltie and divers others To the second That the salvation of all soules dependeth upon the Popes supremacie which the Iesuits are bound by a fourth and supernumerary vow to defend is a bold and blasphemous assertion derogatorie to Christ himselfe who is the Saviour of his body Ephes 5.23 1 Cor. 3.11 and only foundation which beareth up the waight and frame of the whole Catholike Church When Christ said to Peter Thou art Peter and upon this Rocke will I build my Church hee meant not as Saint Austine rightly observeth To build himselfe upon Peter but Peter and the whole Church upon himselfe non super te edificabome sed super me edificabo te The Church was founded and established before there was any Pope or Bishop at Rome and shall so continue when Rome shall perchance be burnt with fire Tract de auferibilit Papae and the Papacie which now tottereth shall be utterly destroyed Doth not their owne Gerson teach that the Pope may be quite removed and yet the Catholike Church still remaine how then can the Jesuit say that the waight and frame of the whole Catholike Church dependeth upon the authoritie of the Pope To the third The Knight used a dilemma or two-forked Argument Either the Popes sworn-Servants and our sworne enemies whose depositions before wee heard against divers articles of the Trent Faith concurred with other Papists in judgement or not if they concurred then by the joynt confession of all for those points at least they are destitute of universality which yet they make a prime note of their Church if others concurred not with them in judgement then their Doctors are divided amongst themselves and consequently they want another speciall marke of their Church which they make unitie in point of Faith To avoid the push of this Ramme the Iesuit starts * Quintil. Institut orat lib. 6. Diverticula et anfractus suffugia sunt infirmitatis ut qui cursu parum valent flexu eludunt aside into a Scholasticall speculation whether any thing is to be held for an article of Faith before it be defined and resolveth the matter thus When a a thing is once defined to wit by the Church then it becomes a matter of Faith Hee should rather determine because this or that is a matter of Faith therefore the Church defineth it to be so and not because the Church defineth it to be so therefore it is a matter of Faith For Faith if it be divine is founded upon Gods Word not the Churches definition if nothing be matter of Faith before it be defined by your Church then Transubstantiation was no article of Faith before the Councell of Laterane and Innocentius the third his dayes nor the Doctrine of Concommitancie and lawfull communicating in one kind before the Councell of Constance under Martin the fift nor the
Popes superioritie to Councels before the Councell at Laterane under Leo the tenth nor most of Pope Pius the fourth his Articles before the late Councell of Trent wherein those points were first defined Then which what Argument can be more forcible to convince the novelty of the Romish Faith But whether an article of Faith is to be accounted such because it is defined to be such by the Church or whether it be defined to be such by the Church because it is such in its owne nature it will little serve the Iesuits turne to make up the breaches of the Roman Church For certaine it is that their Doctors differ amongst themselves even in points defined by the Church For after the bookes of the Old Testament with all the parts knowne by the name of Apocrypha by the Councell of Trent were defined to be of Canonicall authoritie Sixtus Senensis makes scruple of some of them Sixtus Senens bib Sanct. l. 1. After the immaculate conception of our Lady was defined by Sixtus the fourth and the feast in testimonie thereof authorised by him yet the Dominicans generally hold that shee was conceived in sinne After Justification by inherent righteousnesse De Caus instit l. 7. c. 21. was defined in the Councell of Trent Albertus Pighius and others cited by Vegas held the contrary And though the Councell of Trent stigmatize the doctrine touching assurance of salvation yet Ambrosius Catharinus a learned Papist set forth a learned treatise de certitudine salutis Lastly though Pope Leo the tenth in the Councell of Lateran defineth the Pope to be above a generall Councell yet the Sorbonists at this day maintaine that a generall Councell is above the Pope Therefore as St Thomas Moore said pleasantly of a poore Physitian that he was more then medicus to wit by one letter Mor. in Epigr. meaning that he was mendicus Vna tibi plus est litera quam medico so it may truely be said of the unity Papists brag so much of that it is more then Vnity by a letter to wit Vanity To the fourth If the Knight or any Protestant suspended the efficacy of their Baptisme upon the faith of their Parents or as all Papists doe upon the intention of the Priest the Iesuit might with some colour object to us the uncertainty of our Christendome but let him know if he doth not that we maintaine generally that the effect of Baptisme dependeth not upon the faith of the Parents and God-fathers nor yet upon the intention of the Priest knowne to God onely and himselfe but upon his outward action and his words knowne to all the Congregation We say that the observation of Christs institution in baptizing the partie in the name of the Father of the Sonne and of the Holy-ghost and not the Priests hidden intention makes Baptisme effectuall to all that belong to the covenant To the fift The Iesuit most absurdly inferreth absurdities upon his owne Tenet supposing it to be ours whereas we disclaime it affirming that although the Church useth in marriage all meanes possible by questions and answers by joyning hands by plighting their troth in most significant tearmes and confirming their mutuall promises by giving and receiving a ring and denouncing Gods judgments against them in most fearfull manner if they know any thing one by the other why they should not be ioyned in marriage yet because the heart is knowne to God alone the validity of marriage with us dependeth upon the outward profession and sacred action done before sufficient and undoubted witnesse and not the secret intentions of the partie What the Iesuit addeth by way of jeare that a small deale of orders serves our turnes for he seeth not any thing done by vertue of our ordination which any man or woman may not doe without it I hold it not worthy any other answer then that sith he professeth his eye sight to be so dimme he would make use of the Spectacles he made for the Knight by helpe of them if he be not starke blinde he may see that by vertue of our ordination men in holy orders preach the Gospell administer the Sacraments remit and retaine sinnes which if he thinke any man or woman may doe without ordination like the foole in the Poet Dum vitant stulti vitia in contrario currunt he is gone from one extreame to the other and of a Papist become an Anabaptist With us none may execute the Priests office but he that is called thereunto as was Aaron If the Iesuit meane that any man or woman may doe the outward acts of Priesthood de facto though not de Iure may they not doe the like also sometimes among them doth not their Legend tell us that some Boyes getting by heart and pronouncing the words of Consecration hoc est Corpus meum turned all the Bakers bread in the street into flesh Do not Lady Abbesses and Nuns chaunt Mattins together in Romish Chappels Do not Midwives christen children in their Church With what face then can he charge us with those disorders whereof all the world seeth we are free but he and his Church most guilty To the sixt If we can have but a conjecturall and wavering knowledge of our salvation what comfort can a true Christian have in life or death If his hope be onely in this life the Apostle affirmeth expressely 1 Cor. 15.19 that he is of all men most miserable and certainely he is but little better if all his hope in the life to come be no better then a guesse or slender conjecture Iustly therefore did Martin Luther tearme the Romish doctrine concerning uncertainty of salvation non doctrinam fidei sed diffidentiae no doctrine of faith but of diffidence and distrust which if this Iesuit stiffely maintaines I would faine know of him how he interpreteth that Article of the Creed I beleeve the remission of sinnes Is the meaning onely this that there is a remission of some sins in the Church if so then the Devill beleeves as much concerning this Article as he but if as he beleeveth in the Article of the Resurrection the Resurrection of his owne flesh so in the Article of remission of sinnes the remission of his owne sinnes then his owne justification and particular beliefe of his owne saltion is a part of his Catholike faith and if that be but conjecturall then there is no certainty in the Catholike Faith It is true that it is a different thing to dispute of the certainety of the Catholike faith in generall and of every mans private and particular beliefe of his owne justification and salvation yet there is such a dependance betweene them that if the former be uncertaine the latter cannot be certaine Yea but saith the Iesuit we are certaine by the certainty of divine faith not onely that there be seven Sacraments but that they are also truely administred in the Church so as there can be no danger of the failing
of either to the notable preiudice of faith and the salvation of soules I reply first that for five of the seven as was discussed at large Section the fourth the Iesuit is so farre from any certainty that indeede he can bring no probability that there be any such Sacraments in the Catholike Church and for the other two which we acknowledge to be Sacraments properly so called he cannot be certaine that they are ever effectually administred in his Church according to their owne Tenents who suspend the efficacy of them upon the Priests intention Nay farther he cannot be certaine that they have any Church at all amongst them for there can be no Church as they teach without a visible succession of lawfull Pastours whereof hee cannot be certaine sith no man knoweth whether the Bishops who ordained their Priests or the Archbishop who ordained their Bishops or the Pope who consecrated their Archbishops intended that which your Church intendeth and if there failed an intention in any of all these or in him who baptized or ordained their first Pope since the Bishops of Rome began to be Popes hee hath no certainty according to his owne grounds of any Priesthood or Christianitie in his Church To the seventh I never heard before that it could be good or any way profitable surdo fabulum narrare to tell a Tale in the care of a deafe man Where doe the Scriptures or ancient Fathers give any approbation to such senslesse devotion can a man call upon him with faith or any hope of obtaining his suit whom hee conceiveth to be out of his hearing Yea but Gabriel Biel speaketh not doubtfully but certainly of Invocation though hee seeme to doubt of the manner how Saints in heaven know our necessities on earth Biel indeed lispeth somewhat that way but hee speaketh not plaine hee saith Invocantur sancti not sancti sant invocandi hee speaketh confidently and certainly of the practise of the Romane Church out not of the truth of this point of the Romish Faith that Saints ought to be called upon for that hee taught In Can. Missae Dist 31. videri probabile that It may seeme probable that God revealeth to Saints all those suits which men present unto them consequently holdeth that it may seeme also probable that the living may pray unto them But what is this his probabile or Peter Lumbards not incredibile to build an Article of Faith upon Yea but Peter Lumbard though hee make some doubt whether the Saints heare our Prayers as they proceed from us they being in Heaven and wee in Earth they being but in one place Sicut enim Angelis ita etiam sanctis qui Deo assistant petitiones nostrae innotescunt in verbo Dei quod contemplantur and those that call upon them in a million of places distant farre one from the other yet Hee maketh no doubt of their knowing and seeing our Prayers in the Word of God as the Angels doe I answer that this imaginarie Glasse of the Schoolemen wherein they conceive that the Saints and Angels see all things by the contemplation of God in whom are all things hath beene long agoe battered in pieces For if because they see God they must needs see all things that are in him and know all that hee knoweth it would hereupon insue that the Saints knowledge should be infinite as Gods is that they should know the day and houre when Christ shall come to judgement contrary to the expresse words of our Saviour Marke 13.32 that they should know the secrets of all hearts which the Scripture ascribeth as a singular prerogative to God To avoid these Rockes if our Adversaries will confine the knowledge of the Saints or Angels to such things onely as God shall be pleased to reveale unto them they beg then the point in question which they ought to prove viz. That God will reveale to every Saint what every man on earth prayeth to him for To the eighth First the Iesuit in this answer flatly contradicteth Cajetan whom hee undertaketh to defend for if the Church groundeth not the canonization of Saints upon the report of miracles voyced on them Cajetans Argument in that place is weak and of no force Secondly for the authoritie of the See Apostolike and the infallibility of the Popes judgement they are as uncertaine or more then that such persons canonized by the Pope are Saints L. 3. ep 3. nec quisquam sibi quod soli filio tribuit pater vindicare se putet ut ad areum pargandam c. 1 Kings 8.39 Saint Cyprian in his time severely censured those who arrogated to themselves that which the Father hath given to the Sonne onely to wit in the floore of the Church to take the fanne in his hand and sever the Wheat from the Chaffe If God onely knoweth the hearts of all the children of men either the Pope must be God as the Canonists blasphemously called him or hee cannot infallibly know who are true Saints and sincerely beleeve and love God As for Saint Austines complaint that many were worshipped by men on earth that are tormented by the devill in hell they are indefinitely spoken and not restrained to Donatists or any other Heretikes yet were it so wee may see in those Donatists a perfect picture of Papists For what Donatus did in Affrica that doth the Pope in Europe hee canonizeth those of his faction for Saints And as the Donatists gave the honour of Martyrs to those who justly suffered death for Robberies and Murders so doe the Papists crowne the heads of Murderers and Traitours with the garland of Martyrdome witnesse Becket Campian Oldcorne and Garnet whereof the first standeth in the Kalender of Romish Saints the later in the Register of Jesuiticall Martyrs Neither can the Iesuit so easily fillip off the testimonie of Cassander as if hee taxed the ignorant for making a Saint of a Thiefe Cassan consult art 2. and no way touched upon the Pope or your Church for hee layeth not the blame upon the people as the Iesuit here doth but saith simply that Saint Martin found a place honoured in the name of a holy Martyr to be the sepulcher of a wicked Robber Secondly 't is well knowne that the people cry not up at first a Saint or Martyr after his death but the Priests who voyce miracles upon them and keepe their Shrines and Reliques and by shewing them to the people make no lesse gaine than Demetrius and his fellow Crafts-men did of their silver Shrines of Diana To the ninth As hee that plucks the stickes out of the Chimney one by one at last puts out the fire so the Knight by loosening or quite removing the fuell of Purgatorie fire consequently extinguisheth it If all the parts and circumstances of the Doctrine of Popish Purgatory are doubtfull and uncertaine the whole certainly can be no Article of Faith but the Antecedent the Knight proves out of Bellarmine Dominicus a Soto Fisher
Bishop of Rochester Gregorie the great and venerable Bede let the Iesuit therefore looke to the Consequent The Church of Rome commandeth every one upon paine of hell-fire to beleeve a temporarie purging fire after this life First upon what ground Scripture or unanimous consent of Fathers or Tradition of the Catholike Church no such thing But upon apparitions of dead men and testimonie of Spirits whether good Spirits or evill they cannot tell Next wee demand what soules and how long doe they contine there To this they must answer likewise Ignoramus Soto thinketh that none continueth in this purgation ten yeares If this be true saith Bellarmine No soule needs to stay in purging one houre Thirdly the soules that are supposed to be there till their sinnes are purged where with are they purged With fire onely so saith Sir Thomas Moore and proves it out of Zacharie 9.11 Thou hast delivered the prisoners out of the place where there is no water or with water and fire so saith Gregorie in his Dialogues lib. 4. Some are purged by fire and some by bathes and Fisher Bishop of Rochester proves it out of those words of the Psalmist Wee have passed thorow fire and water Fourthly admit they are purged by fire whether is this fire materiall or metaphoricall Ignoramus Wee know not saith Bellarmine lib. 2. de Purg. cap. 6. Lastly is there any mittigation of this paine in Purgatorie or no They cannot tell this neither For venerable Bede hist Ang. lib. 5. tels us of the apparition of a Ghost reporting that There was an infernall place where soules suffered no paine where they had a brooke running through it Neither is it improbable saith Bellarmine l. 2. de Purg. cap. 7. that there should be such an honorable prison which is a most milde and temperate Purgatorie Yea but saith the Iesuit Saint Austin is a firme man for Purgatorie and hee will prove it out of that booke of Enchiridion and place quoted by the Knight Resolutely spoken but so falsly Encharid ad Laurent c 69. Tale aliquid etiam post hanc vitam fieri incredibile non est et utrum ita sit quaeri potest et ut inveniri aut latere possit nonnullos fideles per ignem quendam purgaiorium salvari non tamen tales de quibus dictū est regnum Dei non posside bant that in this very booke chapter 69 Saint Austine speaking of a purging fire and commenting upon the words of Saint Paul Hee shall be saved as it were by fire addeth immediately It is not unlikely that some such thing may be after this life but whether it be so or no it may be argued and whether it can be found or not found that some Beleevers are saved by a purging fire yet it is certaine that none of them shall be saved of whom the Apostle saith they shall not inherit the Kingdome of God And in the same booke chapter 109. he resolves that All soules from the day of their death to their resurrection abide in expectation what shall become of them and are reserved in secret receptacles accordingly as they deserve either torment or ease These hidden Cells or Receptacles wheresoever they are scituated in St. Austins judgment C. 109. Tempus quod inter hominis mortem ultimam resurrectionem interpositum est animus abditis receptaculis continet sicut unaqueque digna est vel requiae vel arumnâ certaine it is they are not in the Popish Purgatory for St. Austine placeth in these secret Mansions all soules indifferently good or bad whereas the Popish Purgatory is restrained only to those of a middle condition being neither exceeding good nor exceeding bad Againe in St. Austines hidden repositories some soules have ease and some paine as each deserveth but in the Romish Purgatory all soules are in little-ease being tormented in a flame little differing from Hell fire or rather nothing at all save onely in time the paines are as grievous but not so durable Else where St. Austine is most direct against Purgatory and wholly for us as namely de peceat meritis de remissione l. 1. c. 28. There is no middle or third place saith he but he must needs be with the Devill who is not with Christ And Hypog l. 5. The first place the faith of Catholikes by divine authority beleeveth to be the Kingdome of Heaven the second to be Hell tertium locum penitùs ignoramus the third place we are alltogether ignorant of and in his booke de vanit seculi cap. 1. Know that when the soule is seperated from the body statim presently it is either placed in Paradise for his good worke or cast headlong into the bottome of hell for his sinnes Neither can the Iesuit evade by saying that there are two onely places where the soules remaine finally and eternally to wit Heaven and Hell but yet that there is a third place where the bodies fry in purging for a time for St. Austine speakes of all soules in generall both good and bad and saith that statim that is presently upon death they are receaved into Heaven or throwne into Hell and therefore stay no time in a Third place What then say we to the passage in which the Iesuit so triumpheth Enchirid. ad Laurenc c. 110. Neither is it to be denied that the soules of the dead are relieved by the piety of their friends living when the Sacrifice of our Mediatour is offered for them and Almes given in the Church We answer that where St. Austine is not constant to himselfe we are not bound to stand to his authority and therefore we appeale from Saint Austine missing his way in this place to the same Austine Nullum auxilium misericordiae potest preberi a justis defunctorum animabus etiamsi justi praebere velint quia est immutabilis divina sententia Qualis quisque moritur talis a Deo judicatur nec potest mutari corrigi vel minus dimia sententia hitting his way elsewhere namely l. 2. Quest Evan. c. 38. There can be no helpe of mercy afforded by just men to the soules of the deceased although the righteous would never so faine have it so because the sentence of God is immutable and Ep. 80. ad Hesich such as a man is when he dieth for such he is judged of God neither can the sentence of God be changed corrected or diminished As for Mr. Anthony Alcots confession that Saint Austines opinion was for purgatorie it maketh not for the Iesuit but against him for he saith it was his opinion not his resolved judgment and his opinion at one place and at one time which after he retracted and resolved the cleane contrary as Mr. Alcots there in part sheweth and Danaeus most fully in his Comment upon St. Austine his Enchiridian ad Laurentium To the tenth If all Papists did agree in this that all Images were to be worshipped but not as Gods yet are they at odds in other
contradict Romish doctrines not out of disobedience to man but out of obedience to him who commandeth us to contend for the true faith and to reprove and convince all gainesayers What Papists intentions are we take not upon us to judge their doctrines we put to the test of Gods word and finde them false and adulterine and all be it some points of their beliefe considered in themselves might seeme indifferent yet as they hold them they are not because they are not of faith Rom. 14.23 and what soever is not of faith is sinne Now no point of the Romish Creed as they hold it is of that faith the Apostle speaketh of that is divine faith because they ground and finally resolve all their articles not upon Gods word but upon the authority of the Pope Resp ad Archiepis Spalaten c. 47. Firmitas fundamenti â—â— firma licet implicita in aureo hoc fundamento veritatis adhaesio valebit ut in Cypriano sic in nobis ad salutem faenum stipula imbecilitas caries in tecto contignatione explicitae erroris opinio non valebit nec in Cypriano nec in nobis ad perâ—â—tiem or Church of Rome which is but the authority of man whereas on the contrary as Doctor Crakent horpe demonstrateth If any Protestant build hay or stubble upon the true foundation he may he saved because be holdeth the true foundation which is that every doctrine of faith ought to be built upon Scripture If the Iesuit wonder at this conclusion let him weigh the Authors reasons and he will be forced to confesse that the errors if there be any in Protestants in regard they sticke close to the true foundation and implicitly deny them cannot in them be damnable whereas the very true doctrines of faith in Papists because they hold them upon a wrong ground and foundation very much derogatory to God and his truth are not so safe To the third With what face can the Iesuit avow this considering that Prieras before alleaged and other writers approved by the Church of Rome mainetaine this blasphemous assertion that the authority of the Church is greater then the anthority of Scripture and all Papists of note at this day hold that the Scripture is but an imperfect and partiall rule of faith all Protestants on the contrary teach that it is an entire and perfect rule of faith Papists believe the Scripture for the Churches sake Protestants the Church for the Scripture sake Papists resolve all points of faith generally into the Popes infalibility or Churches authority Protestants into the written word of God which as Bellarmine himselfe confesseth De verbo Dei non script l. 4. c. 11. containeth all things necessary for all men to beleeve and is a most certaine and safe rule of beleeveing Yea but saith the Iesuit out of Vincentius Lerinensis De verbo Dei l. 1. c. 2. he that will avoid the deceits and snares of Haeretikes and remaine soundin the faith must strengthen his faith two wayes to wit by the authority of the divine law and the tradition of the Catholike Church This advise of Vincentius is sound and good if it be rightly understood and not in the Iesuits sense Vincentius there by tradition of the Catholike Church understandeth not unwritten verities but the Catholike expositions of holy Scriptures extant in the writings of the Doctors of the Church in all ages and we grant that this Catholike exposition of the Doctors where it can be had is of great force to confirme faith and confound Heretikes Vt Scripturae ecclesiastice intelligentiae jungatur authoritas For the stopping of whose mouth that Father saith and we deny it not that there is great neede to add to the Scripture the Churches sense or interpretation albeit as he there addeth which cutteth the throat of the Iesuits cause The Canon of Scripture is perfect and sufficient of it selfe for all things nay rather as hee correcteth himselfe Over and above sufficient cum sit perfectus scripturae canon sibique adomnia satis superque sufficiat To the fourth Here the Iesuit would make his Reader study a little and his Adversarie to muse Vero nihil verius certo nihil certius but it is indeed whether hee be in his right wits or no. For first as Seneca well resolveth one thing cannot be said truer than another one truth in Divinitie may be more evident to us than another but in it selfe it cannot be truer or surer Secondly admitting there could be degrees of certainty at least quoad nos there can be yet no comparison in regard of such certaintie betweene an Article of the Creed assented unto by all Christians and a controverted conclusion maintained onely by a late faction in the Westerne Church But the sitting of Christ at the right hand of his Father is an Article of the Creed set downe in expresse words in holy Scripture Mark 16.19 Luke 24. consented unto by all Christians in the world whereas the carnall presence of Christ in the Sacrament by Tranfubstantiation is no Article extant in any Creed save onely that of Pope Pius his coyning in the yeare of our Lord 1564. It is neither in words set downe in Scripture as the other Articles are neither can it be necssarily inforced or deduced by consequence as foure great Cardinals of the Roman Church confesse Cameracensis Cajetan Roffensis and Bellarmine Neither was this Doctrine of the Romane Church ever assented unto by the Greeke Church nor by the Latine anciently or generally as I shewed before Thirdly the Iesuit contradicteth himselfe within eight lines for having said in the eighteenth line Pag. 384. that Christ his corporall presence in the Sacrament was more sure than his presence in heaven at the right hand of his Father about seven lines after forgetting himselfe hee saith that Wee shall find as much to doe marke as much not more in expounding that Article of the Creed as they doe in expounding the words This is my Body Wherein it is well hee confesseth that Papists make much to doe in expounding the words This is my Body which is most true for by the demonstrative Hoc they understand they know not what Neither this Body nor this Bread but an Individum vagum something contained under the accidents of Bread which when the Priests saith Hoc it is Bread but when hee hath muttered out an Vm it is Christs Body Likewise by the Copula est is they understand they know not what either shall be as soone as the words are spoken or is converted unto or is by Transubstantiation Lastly by Body they understand such a body as indeed is no body without the extension of place without distinction of Organs without facultie of sense or motion and will hee make this figment so incredible so impossible as sure nay more sure than the Article of Christs ascension into heaven and his sitting at the right hand of his
Spiridion that famous Bishop of Cyprus Eccles Hist l. 1. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 they lived in wedlocke and had many children without any disparagement at all to their Sacred function As the Rod of Aaron in these brought forth fruit in Holy Matrimony so it budded also in others in our Church who followed virginall chastity and lead a single life as Iewell Reinolds Andrewes Lakes and many other reverend Prelates and Doctors who for eminent learning and examplary life may compare with any of the Romish Mitred Prelates or late Canonized Saints Neither can they pretend that any Eve gave these an Apple whereby their eyes were opened but on the contrary we can produce many a Lucretia who have given Apples to their Popes Lucretia nomine sed re Thais Alexandri filia sponsa nurus whereby their eyes have beene blinded and their reputation for ever blasted See Picus Mirandula his oration extant in Fasciculus rerum expetendum fugiendum and Mantuan his Poem Sanctus ager scurris venerabilis ara cinaedis Servit honorandae Divûm Ganymedibus aedes As for Olivereus Manareus his Legend of Buxhorne if the Reader will be pleased to peruse an apologie for this Buxhorne written to the Chancellor of Lovan wherein the true cause is related for which this licentiate Divine abandoned the Papacy he shall finde in that treatise printed in the yeare of our Lord 1625 a Rowland for his Oliver or Oliverius Manareus the Iesuit to whose relation as much credit is to be given as to Cocleus his History of Luther and Bolsecs of Calvin The Devill the grand Calumniator hath suborned in all ages men of prostituted consciences and corrupt mindes and mouthes to staine with their impure breath the golden and the silver vessells of the Sanctuarie but Illi linguarum nos aurium dominsumus their tongues are their owne they may speake what malice dictateth our eares are our owne and we will hearken unto and assent onely to what truth confirmeth As for their Lutheran baits he mentioneth aurum gloria dilitiae veneres gold glory delights and Venus if these things abound any where it is in the Roman Church where the Pope who pretends himselfe to be the successor of Peter the fisher fisheth with a golden hooke and baits it with fleshly lusts what so pompeous and glorious as his Holinesse triple Crowne and his Cardinals Hats and his Bishops Miters and Croziours for what sence hath not the Romish Religion baits for the eyes they have gawdie shewes for the eares most melodious musicke for the smell sweetest incense and perfumes for the taste feasts without number for the touch whole streets of Curtezans not onely in Rome it selfe but in all the Popes Townes which are commonly knowne by this fowle Cognizance Concerning our adversaries their blasphemous exceptions against the Scripture Spectacles Chap. 14. à page 447. usque ad 463. THough Catholikes hold for most certaine that the Scripture is not the sole rule of faith nor that out of it alone all controversies can be decided as for example in particular which bookes be Canonicall Scripture which not yet for most things now a dayes in controversie many Catholikes have offered to trie the matter onely by Scripture Though Catholikes ground many points upon tradition and practice of the Church yet they ground others upon plaine and expresse authority of Scripture from which Protestants are faine to flie running to this or that corner of I know not what figurative or tropicall interpretation Though the Pope question not much lesse condemne Scriptures of obscurity and insufficiency yet his Apostles and Evangelists have left some things in writing of which some are hard even by the judgment of Scripture it selfe for so saith Saint Peter of the Epistle of Saint Paul which saith he the unlearned and unconstant doe abuse as they doe other Scriptures to their owne perdition If any condemne the Scripture of insufficiency it is St. John in saying that all things are not written and St. Paul in willing the Thessalonians to hold the traditions which they had learned whether by speech or letter Whereas the Knight chargeth us with ranking the Bible in the first place of prohibited bookes wee say it is false for it is not in the Catalogue of such bookes onely in the rules which concernes the Index there is mentioned how the free use of vulgar translations is not to be permitted but for the Latine vulgar translation there is no manner of restraint though if there had beene we might very well have warranted it by the authority of St. Jerome who did no way admit such free use even of the Latine Bibles It is no such crime to forbid the reading of Scripture to some sort of people as may appeare by the testimony of this holy Father who in the same place saith moreover that the beginning of Genesis and the beginning and end of Ezekiel were not to be read by the Iewes till they came to thirties yeare of age A kinde of forbidding of reading the Scripture is no derogation but a great commendation of it for they are forbidden to be read out of reverence and honour due unto them and in regard of the danger which may come by them not of themselves but in regard of the weakenesse of the Reader for want of necessary learning and humility For Cornelius Agrippa it maketh no more matter what he saith then what the Knight saith for it is but aske my brother if I be a theefe Not to answer the places objected by the Knight out of Lindan Lessius Turrian and Pighius I say in generall that those things are spoken not of the Scripture as it is in it selfe that is consisting of both words and meaning but of bare words and letters only which Haeretikes still do and ever have abused as the Devill himselfe did to our Saviour and in this sense it is a wood of theeves Our Authors say no more then St. Jerome doth in effect Marcion Basilides and other plagues of Haeretikes have not the Gospell of God Comment in 1. ad Gal. because they have not the Holy Ghost without whom it becommeth the Gospell of man which is taught nor let us thinke that the Gospell consisteth in the words of Scripture but in the sense not in the superficies or barke but in the pith not in the leaves of speech but in the roote of reason so that if the Knight will say any more of this matter he must undertake the quarrell against St. Ierome Lessius in particular whom the Knight most up braideth to us is farre from saying that the Scripture is uncertaine in it selfe that is that the doctrine thereof is doubtfull but onely that our rule will be uncertaine or rather wee uncertaine of the rule because wee cannot know the Scripture by it selfe It is not all one to say that Scripture alone is no sufficient Rule and to say it is imperfect For although the Knight imagineth that the
it cannot be denyed that the Protestants in all their Translations have a recourse still to the Originall of Hebrew and Greek which was inspired by the Holy Ghost and these they preferre before all Latine and Vulgar Translations whatsoever Bibl. Complut in Proefat on the other side your Translation as your Interpreters fancie hangeth betweene the Greek and Hebrew as Christ hung betweene two theeves Nay more your men esteeme the Vulgar Latine before the Originall Bell. de verbo Dei lib. 2. c. 11. Not saith Bellarmine that the rivers of Translations should be preferred before the fountaines of Hebrew and Greeke of the Prophets and Apostles but because the fountaine is muddie in many places which otherwise should runne cleare for without doubt as the Latine Church hath beene more constant in keeping the faith than the Greeke so likewise it hath beene more vigilant in preserving her bookes from corruption These Paradoxes doe open a gap to Atheisme for if the originall Scripture be corrupted what assurance what certaintie can wee have of true faith and religion and if wee doubt wee are condemned already Neither can it enter into my thoughts that profane Writers should bee preserved in their simple purenesse from their first ages and that their Translations should remaine in subjection to their copies from whence they are derived to be examined by them and yet the Watchman of Israel who neither slumbers nor sleepes for want of providence should suffer his sacred Word become a Tributarie to a Translation But by this the world may see the guiltinesse of a bad cause you will rather charge the word of God it selfe with corruption than faile to make good the corruptions of your owne Church Your learned Andradius condemnes them that preferred the Latine before the Hebrew of the Old Testament as pretending it was corrupted by the Jewes Andrad def fidei Trident. l. 4. It was very inconsiderately conceived saith he by some that there was more credit to bee given to the Latine Edition than to the Hebrew because the Latine ever remained entire uncorrupt in the Catholique Church and the Hebrew was falsified depraved by the perfidiousnesse of the Jewes And your owne Sixtus Senensis doth witnesse of the Greeke Text likewise Sixt. Senens Biblioth l. 7. that it is the same which was used in the dayes of S. Hierome and long before him in the Apostles times and is free from hereticall corruptions as by the continuall writings of the Greeke Fathers as namely Dionysius Justinus Irenaeus Melito Origen Affricanus Apolinarius Athanasius Eusebius Basil Chrysostome Theophylact doth most plainly appeare and yet your Gregory Martin and the Rhemists are not ashamed to professe that the Translation which they follow is not onely better then all other Latine but even than the Greeke Text it selfe Preface to the Rhem. Testam in those places where they disagree To examine your Translation in generall and so descend into the particulars of yours and ours First it is decreed by the Councell of Trent that amongst divers Translations then in use Concil Trid. Sess 4. Decretam de editione librorum the old and vulgar Translation should be declared to be authenticall in all publike Lectures Disputations Sermons and Expositions and that no man should dare or presume to reject it upon any pretext whatsoever What Translation was understood by the old vulgar was not expressed in the Councell It is pretended to be and is called at this day St. Hieromes Translation and which is remarkable the Translation was decreed but by 42. Bishops at the first beginning of the Councell From hence ariseth the first Quere which of St. Hieromes Translations your Church doth follow for St. Hierome confesseth that the first was corrupt and accordingly he did correct many things in his first Translation To this Objection your Cardinall makes this faire and free confession Bell. de verbo Dei l. 2. c. 9. Although Hierome did perceive some things fit to be changed and afterwards did change them yet the Church did adjudge the first translation for true and chose rather to keep that for the vulgar Edition And then he concludes Although the greatest part of the vulgar Translation be Hieromes yet it is not that pure Edition which he translated out of the Hebrew but in a manner mixt Habemus confitentem reum Now heare your owne Sixtus Senensis Albeit he pretends that the different readings in the Bible be no prejudice to the Faith Sixt. Senens Bibl. l. 8. p. 664. yet saith he wee ing enuously confesse that many errours were corrected by Hierome in the old Translation and likewise there are found in our new Editions some falsifications solecismes barbarismes and many things ambiguous not well expressed in the Latine some things changed other things omitted and the like Here both confesse that Hieromes first Translation was erroneous and the one saith that your Church hath chosen that which is not pure nor agreeable to the Hebrew the other confesseth it hath Barbarismes and untruths To speake ingeniously the Sunne never saw any thing more defective and maimed than the vulgar Latine Your Bishop Lyndan cryes aloud Lynd. de opt genere Interpret l. 3. c. 1 2 4.6 and protesteth it hath monstrous corruptions of all sorts scarce one coppie can be found that hath one booke of Scripture undefiled many points are translated so intricately and darkly some impertinently and abusively some not so fully nor so well and truly sundry places thrust out of their plaine and naturall sense the Translatour possibly was no Latinist but a smattering Grecian I proceed to the examination of more witnesses About forty yeares after Pope Paul the third had decreed the vulgar Latin in your Councel of Trent Sixtus Quintus by his Breve prefixed to his Bible gives us to understand that certaine Roman Catholikes were of such an humour of translating the Scripture into Latin Breve Sixti 5. that Sathan taking occasion by them though they thought no such matter did strive what he could out of uncertaine and great variety of Translation so to mingle all things that nothing might seeme to be left certaine and firme in them and thereupon hee takes occasion to publish a Latine Translation of his owne perusall and withall makes his Declaration of it in this manner We of our certaine knowledge and fulnesse of Apostolicall power Sixt. 5. in Bulla praefix Bibliis An. 1588. doe ordaine and declare that the Edition of the vulgar Bible of the Old and New Testament which was received by the Councell of Trent as authenticall without any doubt or Controversie is to be reputed or taken for this onely Edition which being as well as was possible reformed and printed in our Vatican our will and pleasure is and we doe decree it to be read throughout the whole Christian World in all Churches with this our determination and satisfaction for all men That first it was allowed