Law ought to be judged erroneous and they that pertinaciously maintain the opposite of the Premises are to be expelled as Hereticks 59. Against Communion in one kinde he saith Paschasius resolves it dogmatically that neither the flesh without the blood nor the blood without the flesh is rightly communicated because the Apostles did all of them drink of the Chalice When he resolves it not dogmatically but onely argues it in way of discourse nor doth he give any such reason Because the Apostles c nor saith any thing there but what is verified in the Priest celebrating or in a Communicant in either kinde onely The sense is manifest that now his flesh is broken because in the Chalice is the blood that flowed out of his side And therefore very rightly is the flesh sociated with the blood because neither the flesh without the blood nor the blood without the flesh is rightfully or lawfully communicated But the whole man who consists of two substances is redeemed and therefore he is saginated with the flesh and blood of Christ together And therefore they are well rendred together in the Chalice because from one cup of Christs Passion these two flowed to us unto life Sect. 7. 60. Against our Latine Mass he saith S. Chrysostome urging the Apostles precept for Prayers in a Language understood by the hearers saith That if a man speak in the Persian tongue and understands not what himself saith to himself he is a Barbarian and therefore so he is to him that understands no more then he does When S. Chrysostome neither urged there any precept of the Apostle nor spake of Prayers nor used altogether that form of words for these are his words If one speak in onely the Persian or some other strange tongue but knows not what he saith certainly he will be now a Barbarian even to himself and not to another onely because he knows not the force of the word 61. To the same purpose he quotes Lyra That in the Primitive Church Blessings and all other things in the Church were done in the vulgar tongue when Lyra saith not caetera omnia but caetera communia Blessings and other common things 62 63. He saith we are told by S. Chrysostome and S. Augustine That the Bible was translated into all Languages when they tell us no such thing 64 65 66 67 68 69. To prove that the Fathers tell us That a Service or Prayers in an unknown tongue do not edifie he quotes S. Basil S. Chrysostome S. Ambrose S. Augustine Aquinas and Lyra when S. Basil hath no such Book as he quotes and none of the other hath any such words 70. Against our Latine Mass he quotes a Canon of the Lateran Council as if that had ordain'd that all people should have Mass in their vulgar tongue when it onely took care that where those who used Mass in divers Languages and with divers Rites as Greeks Latines Maronites c. lived in one City or Diocess the Bishop should provide every of them might have Mass and other Rites according to the manner of their own Church Because in most parts within the same City and Diocess the people of divers Tongues are mixed together having under one and the same Faith divers Ceremonies and Rites We command that the Bishop provide men fit who may celebrate according to the diversity of Ceremonies and Languages Sect. 8. 71. He saith S. Cyril denies that the Christians did give veneration to the Image even of the Cross it self But he names not which Cyril he means and if him of Alexandria as is most like what Book of his he means and if his 6th Book against Julian where Julian objects to the Christians their folly in worshipping the Cross as there is no other so probable to be meant S. Cyril doth there not onely not deny that the Christians worship it but seems rather to avow and justifie it For this was the Apostates Objection O wretched people whereas the Arms are preserved which great Jupiter sent down ye refuse to adore and worship them and in the mean time ye adore the wood of the Cross painting Images of it in your foreheads and afore your houses To which S. Cyrils answer is He saith they are wretched who have care alwayes to sign their houses and foreheads with the sign of the precious Cross we will shew that these kinde of speeches favour extream ignorance For the Saviour and Lord of all c. all these things that he did and suffered for us the health-giving wood makes us to remember ... We make a Cross of the precious wood in remembrance of all good and vertue 72. He saith the Epistle of Epiphanius in which is the story of his cutting in pieces a picture of Christ or some Saint which he found in a Church was translated into Latine by S. Jerom by which we may guess at his opinion in the question when S. Jerom translated indeed that Epistle but it appears not that this story was in that Epistle that S. Jerom translated which is a great argument that that story was foisted into that Epistle after S. Jeroms time 73 74 75. He saith S. Augustin complaining that he knew of many in the Church who were worshippers of Pictures calls them Superstitious and addes that the Church condemns such customs and strives to correct them and quotes for this three places when in the two latter of them he hath not a word to any such purpose and in the first he neither speaks of worshippers of Pictures apart or by it self alone as here he quotes him nor doth he formally call them Superstitious nor doth he adde that the Church condemns such customs for these are his words Do not follow the routs of the ignorant who even in the true Religion it self are superstitious or so given to lusts c. I know that some are adorers of Sepulchres and Pictures I know some who most riotously drink over the dead and exhibitting banquets to the Carcasses upon the buried bury themselves I know there are many that have renounced the world c. 76 77 78 79 80 81 82. He saith Eginardus Hincmarus Aventinus Blondus Adon Amonius and Regino tell us that the Bishops of Francfort condemned the second Synod of Nice or the seventh General that establisht the worship of Images and commanded it should not be call'd a General Council and published a Book under the name of the Emperor confuting that Antichristian Assembly when one of his Authors Eginard mentions not any of this and not one of them mentions that the Council of Francfort publisht any such Book under the name of the Emperor and Amonius saith not it condemned the second Nicene but the Synod which had assembled at Constantinople and Hincmarus saith onely it condemned the Synod which had assembled at Nice without the Popes authority
c who never were in Purgatory where if he mean likewise as he must or it was impertinently urged that Durantus acknowledges that they prayed for them as for the rest of the dead and namely that God would shew them mercy or pardon them Durantus saith no such thing but the direct contrary Truly in Epiphanius and Cyril and the Canon of the Greeks is read that they offered Sacrifice to God for the Patriarchs Apostles Martyrs c. which signifies the same as in our Canon Communicantes memoriam venerantes gloriosae semper Virginis c. For when the Greeks say We offer for the Martyrs c. it is not understood that we commend them to God but we commemorate them for their glory and to give God thanks for the glory he hath bestowed on them ... The Priest prayes nothing for them but rather prayes them that he may be helped by their prayers c. 32. He quotes Sixtus Senensis as saying That Pope John 22. not onely taught and declared the Doctrine that before the day of Judgement the Souls of men are kept in certain receptacles c. but commanded it to be held by all as saith Adrian P. in 4. Sent. When Sixtus Senensis saith not so of Pope John but onely reports the opinion of others nor doth he quote Pope Adrian as saying so but onely as reporting also what others said for these are Sixtus Senensis his words It is said that Pope John 22. subscribed to their opinion and decreed that it ought so to be believed Witnesses of this Decree are Occham and Adrian VI. whose words are these Finally it is reported of John 22. that he publiquely taught c. And afterward Sixtus Senensis shewes the uncertainty of that report Know that it is not altogether certain with approved Authors that which Occham being offended with him and in this condemned by the Council of Trent wrote of him yea there want not Authors of highest authority and credit that relate the contrary and among them Benedict XI c. 33. To prove that S. Augustin doubted of Purgatory he quotes these words of his Whether it be so or not it may be enquired and possibly it may be found so and possibly it may be never And he quotes two places for it In neither of which S. Augustin speaks of Purgatory directly but of grief for the loss of temporal good things too much loved burning some just men here and perhaps hereafter too In Enchiridion For this wood hay and straw may not absurdly be interpreted such affections to secular things although lawfully had as they cannot be lost without grief of minde But when this grief burns if Christ have in the heart place of the foundation that is that he who is so burnt had rather want those things which he so loves then want Christ he is saved through fire ... For the grief of the lost things which he loved burns him but consumes him not being guarded by the stability of the foundation That some such thing such a burning grief for loss of temporal things is done even after this life is not incredible and whether it be so or not may be enquired and either be found or lie hid that some faithful men are later or sooner saved by a certain Purgatory fire by how much they more or less loved perishing goods And much to the same sense is the other place quoted If in this interval of time betwixt Death and the Resurrection the spirits of the dead may be said to suffer this kinde of fire which they feel not who had no such manners and loves in the life of this body but others feel which carried these kinde of buildings with them of wood hay and stubble upon Christ the foundation either there alone or both here and there or therefore here that not there they finde a fire of transitory tribulation burning saecularia worldly affections delights offences c. although venial from damnation I oppose or censure it not because perhaps it is true c. 34. To prove that in the time of Otho Frisingens in Anno 1146 the Doctrine of Purgatory was uncertain and gotten no further then to a Quidam asserunt he quotes these words of Otho Some do affirm that there is a place of Purgatory after death shamefully corrupting both the sense and words of this Author for neither doth Otho say after death nor mean it but after the day of general judgement as the Doctor himself could not but see if he read the place For the title of that Chap. is An post judicium extra infernum inferiorem ad leviores poenas locus remaneat Et quid de parvulis qui solo originali tenentur Whether after judgement i.e. the day of doom there remain any place without the nether most hell for lighter pains And what will become of Infants that dye in onely original sin And in the Chapter he treats of it thus His dictis indagandum puto si transacto Judicio extra inferum inferiorem ad leviores poenas locus remaneat Esse quippe apud inferos seil after the day of judgement locum Purgatorium in quo salvandi vel tenebris tantùm assiciantur that is for some time vel expiationis igne decoquantur quidam asserunt juxt a illud Apostoli Ipse autem salvus erit sed quasi per ignem At si terminatis in judicio causis singulorum pro qualitate meritorum aeternis poenis deputatis nullus ultra purgabitur quomodo locus ille superior Purgatorius residuus erit si verò non remanebit ut de aliis taceam quid de parvalis qui solo originali renentur delicto fiet nunquid in puteum inferni inferioris ipsi trudentur 35. He saith that in the Speculum Exemplorum it is said that a certain Priest in an extasie saw the Soul of Constantinus Turritanus in the eves of his house c. when in the place quoted is not a word to any such purpose 36. He saith that the Greek Church did alwayes dissent from the Latines in this particular touching Purgatory and in the Council of Basil publisht an Apology directly disapproving the Romane Doctrine of Purgatory And that how afterwards they were press'd in the Council of Florence by Pope Eugenius and by their necessity how unwillingly they consented how ambiguously they answered how they protested against having that half consent put into the Instrument of Union how they were yet constrain'd to it by their Chiefs being obnoxious to the Pope how a while after they dissolved that Union and to this day refuse to own this Doctrine are things so notoriously known that they need no further declaration All which things are so notoriously false as there needs no further declaration of the falsifying spirit of this Doctor But for the other falsities I must wave them my business at present being onely to note his false Quotations and
Apostles who it is manifest are Gods helpers because they are the Vicars of Christ. Therefore they the Apostles received from God the Father by Christ our Lord this power that in our Lords stead they should make the Doctrine of our Lord acceptable 116. He saith The Pope calls himself the Universal Bishop and the Vicarial Head of the Church the Churches Monarch he from whom all Ecclesiastical authority is derived to whose Sentence in things Divine every Christian under pain of damnation is bound to be subject And quotes for this the Canon Unam Sanctam when in that Canon there is not any one of these Sentences but onely that he is the Vicarial Head of the Church Of one onely Church there is one onely Head to wit Christ and his Vicar Peter and his successors we define it to be altogether necessary to every humane creature to salvation to be subject to the Roman Bishop 117. He saith S. Ambrose saith the Bishop holdeth the place of Christ and is his substitute and quotes for it S. Ambrose ubi supra and we have seen afore that S. Ambrose in none of those places saith any such thing 118. To prove that the Bishops of Rome had no superiority by the Laws of Christ over any Bishop and that his Bishoprick gave no more power to him then Christ gave to the Bishop of the smallest Diocess he quotes Pope Symmachus As it is in the Holy Trinity whose power is one and undivided or to use the expression in the Athanasian Creed none is before or after other none is greater or less then another so there is one Bishoprick amongst divers Bishops and therefore why should the Canons of the ancient Bishops be violated by their successors When 1. there is no such saying of Symmachus in the place quoted 2. The Epistle which he meant and is to be found in the Tomes of the Councils is not a little altered and mangled by him in the very words 1. Symmachus saith not as he quotes him As it is in the Holy Trinity c. So there is one Bishoprick c. And therefore why should c. But thus For whilst there is like unto the Trinity whose power is one and individual one Bishoprick c. how agrees it or is it becoming c. 2. Symmachus saith not there is one Bishoprick inter multos amongst many Bishops as he renders it as if equalling all Bishops then living one to another but there is one per multos through many that is through the line of Bishops succeeding to one another in the same See and so it onely equals the successor to his predecessor 3. Where Symmachus saith priorum of former Bishops or predecessors in that See he translates it of the ancient Bishops 4. Finding that these words would make nothing to his purpose he wrests them to it with a Gloss None is before or after other none is greater or less then another and then inferres that these words do fully declare that the Roman Bishoprick gave no more power to the Pope then Christ gave to the Bishop of the smallest Diocess when he could but know that his gloss and inference had not onely no foundation in Symmachus's words but were directly contrary to the whole substance and drift of the Epistle it being an answer to a Letter of Complaint of the Archbishop of Arles to the Pope against the Archbishop of Vienna for invading the rights of the Church of Arles for ordaining some neighbour Bishops upon pretence of some Breve or Rescript of Pope Anastasius Symmachus his predecessor wherein he had contraried the Grants of former Popes to the Church of Arles and desiring from the Pope redress in it and he promises to redress it and gives for his reason the words quoted by the Doctor because it was not well done of Anastasius to contrary the Acts of his predecessors all which proves that the Roman Bishop was superior to those Archbishops of Arles and Vienna and had jurisdiction over them and that Symmachus himself thought so We have received your Letters by which appears there is a controversie betwixt the Churches of Arles and Vienna concerning ordaining of Bishops in neighbouring Cities caused by this that our predecessor of happy memory Anastasius had commanded some things to be observed contrary to the ancient custome transgressing the Ordinance of his predecessors which he ought not to have done for any necessity whatsoever For seeing there is but one Bishoprick through divers Bishops like the Trinity whose power is one and individual how is it becoming the Statutes of former Popes to be violated by them that follow c. 119. To the same purpose he quotes S. Dionysius As the whole Hierarchy ends in Jesus so does every particular one in its own Bishop As if he had meant that every Bishop was supreme Governour next under Christ in his own Diocess when he meant onely that the order of Bishops was the supreme Hierarchical order in compare to Priests Deacons c. The Divine order therefore of Bishops is the first of those Orders which see God and he is also the highest and the last For in him is finished and compleated all the distinction of our Hierarchy For as we see all our Hierarchy to end in Jesus c. 120 121 122 123. To the same purpose he quotes Origen Gelasius S. Jerom and Fulgentius as teaching That the Bishops have the supreme place in the Church But 1. for Origen he quotes no book nor hath Origen any saying to that sense to exclude the Primacy of the Roman See 2 For Fulgentius he quotes him in Concil Paris l. 1. c. 3. but tells not what Council of Paris he means nor what Fulgentius nor in what Collection the book is to be found I can finde no such in Fulgentius his Works nor in the Tomes of Councils nor in the Councils of France set out by Syrmondus 3. For Gelasius he teaches no such thing for all he saith is this There are two things by which this World is principally governed the sacred Authority of Bishops and Regal power Betwixt which the burthen of Bishops is so much the heavier by how much they are in the divine examen to give an account even for Kings themselves c. 4. For S. Jerom he quotes two places one is in Hom. 7. in Jerem. when he hath no such work of Homilies upon Jeremy and if he meant his Commentary upon the seventh Chapter of Jeremy there is not a tittle in it to any such purpose The other is in his Book adversus Lucifer in which likewise I can finde nothing to this purpose 124. He saith that when Bellarmin is in this question about the Pope's Supremacy press'd out of the Book of Nilus by the authority of the Fathers standing against him he answers the Pope acknowledges no Fathers in the Church for they are all his Sons As if Bellarmin had
which could not mean the second Nicene and Blondus saith it abrogated the seventh Synod and the Felician Heresie for taking away of Images 83 84 85. He saith it appears in the writings of Clemens Alexandrinus Tertullian and Origen that in those times they would not allow the making of Images when Tertullian saith no such thing and neither of the other two speaks of the Images of Christ or his Saints but of Jupiter and the other Heathen gods Sect. 9. 86 87 88 89 90 91 92. Against picturing those forms wherein God hath appeared which is all that some of ours do allow and practise he quotes Tertullian Eusebius Athanasius S. Hierom Theodoret Damascen Nicephorus and others when divers of these as namely Tertullian Eusebius and Jerom have nothing to this purpose and the rest spake onely against representing God as in his own essence shape or form as appears by their words which it would be too long to set down But to instance in one or two Theodoret Ye saw no likeness c. He saith this instructing them that they should not make any Idol nor at any time attempt to counterfeit the Divine Image when they never saw the species of the archetype c. Nicephorus They made Images of the Father Son and Holy Ghost which is most absurd for Images are of bodies that may be seen and circumscribed not of those who are invisible and incomprehensible by our understanding Sect. 10. 93. To prove that Christ left his Apostles without any Eminency in one above the rest he saith S. Paul gave the Bishops congregated at Miletum caution to take care of the whole flock of God when the Text hath no such thing but rather the contrary The flock over which the H. Ghost hath made you Bishops 94. To the same purpose he quotes S. Cyprian The other Apostles are the same that S. Peter was c. wresting them against that which S. Cyprian did in that very place expresly assert to wit an Eminency in S. Peter above the rest of the Apostles though not in the species of the power yet in the manner and degree of it viz. that Christ gave it first to S. Peters person as the origen of unity as would have appeared had he set down the words immediately before and after which most plainly and solidly maintain S. Peters Primacy notwithstanding that parity Our Lord said to Peter Upon this Rock I will build my Church and again Do thou feed my sheep Upon him one person he builds his Church and to him he commends his Sheep to be fed And although after his Resurrection he gave to all his Apostles equal power and say As my Father sent me so I send you yet that he might manifest unity that the Church was to be one by the unity of the Governour he constituted one Chair in S. Peters person and by his authority disposed the origen of unity beginning from one person S. Peter Then follow the words quoted by the Doctor The other Apostles are the same that S. Peter was c. After which these But the beginning comes from unity the Primacy is given to Peter that one Church of Christ and one Chair may be monstrated That is they were all equal in power and honour but Peter had it with this Eminency above the rest that it was settled first in his single person 95 96 usque 113. To prove that all Antiquity does consent and teach that all the ordinary power of the Apostles descended to the Bishops as their successors though it be a truth and maintained by us yet of his twenty Quotations brought for it no less then eighteen are false or wrested viz. 1. Irenaeus l. 4. c. 43. saith onely We ought to obey the Presbyters that are in the Church that have succession from the Apostles who with succession of Episcopacy have received the certain Charisma of truth 2. Id. ib. c. 44. Hath not a word to this purpose 3. S. Cypr. l. 1. Ep. 6. Hath not a word to this purpose 4. Id. l. 2. Ep. 10. He saith onely this The unity delivered by our Lord and through the Apostles to us successors 5. Id. l. 4. Ep. 9. Saith nothing of Bishops but what is as true of Presbyters Christ said to his Apostles and by this to all that are praepositi who by Vicarious Ordination succeed to the Apostles He that despiseth you despiseth me 6. S. Ambrose de dign Sacred c. 1. Saith nothing but what rather makes against the Doctor viz. That all Bishops received the Keyes of the Kingdom of Heaven in the B. Apostle Peter 7. S. Aug. de Bap. co Donat. l. 7. c. 43. onely sets down the Sentence of one of the African Bishops Clarus a Muscula for the rebaptizing of Hereticks 8. Id. de verb. Dom. Serm. 24. saith nothing but what pertains to Priests as much as Bishops He that despises you despises me If he had said this to the Apostles alone despise us But if his word have come unto us and called us and placed us in their room see that ye despise not us 9. Conc. Rom. sub Sylv. saith nothing but that men should not detract from the Disciples of our Lord that is the successors of the Apostles 10. Anacletus P. Ep. 2. saith nothing but that the Pillars of the Holy Church which the Apostles and their successors are not unrightly called should not be easily shaken or accused 11. S. Clem. P. Ep. 1. saith nothing but that the Bishops supply the place of the Apostles as Priests do of the 72. Disciples whose successors properly they are not 12. S. Hieron Ep. 13. hath not a word to this sense 13. Id. Ep. 54. saith no more but that Bishops with us Catholiques hold the place of the Apostles whereas the Montanists put them down to the third place 14. Euthym. in Ps. 44. hath nothing to this purpose 15. S. Greg. in Evang. Hom. 26. saith no more but that Bishops hold now in the Church the place of them to whom Christ said Whose sins ye forgive c. 16. S. Jerom whom I suppose the Doctor meant for S. Gregory hath no such Epistle Ep. 1. ad Heliodor speaks not of Bishops properly but of Priests God forbid I should speak any sinister thing of them who succeeding to the Apostolique degree with their sacred mouth make Christs Body 17. S. Damasc. de Imag. Or. 2. onely useth the words of the Apostle God hath set in the Church first Apostles then Prophets c. 18. S. Greg. Naz. Orat. 21. de Laud. Athanas. not as he quotes it Basilii hath not a word to this purpose 114 115. He saith Bishops are in express terms called by S. Ambrose Vicars of Christ and quotes two places for it in neither of which S. Ambrose speaks of Bishops but onely of the Apostles We are the helpers of God This pertains to the person of the