doctrina cum nostra consonat Ecclesia Patr. resp 2. in init resp 1. p. 148. We giue thankes to God the Authour of all grace and wee reioyce with many others but especially in this that in many things your doctrine is agreeable to our Church And certainly we likewise haue great cause to reioyce in our owne behalfe and theirs that the Greeke Church hath continued the truth of our doctrine in all ages which plainely shewes the Antiquitie and Visibilitie of our Church in the affirmatiue poynts which we maintaine and the Noueltie of the Romane in those Negatiue opinions which we condemne If we looke beyond Luther we shall easily discerne that the Muscouites Armenians Egyptians Aethiopians and diuers other countreys and Nations all members of the Greeke Church taught our Doctrine from the Apostles time to ours This is so true an Euidence in our behalfe that Bellarmine as it were in disdaine of the Churches Bell. de ver Dei l 2. ca. vlt. in fine makes this answere We are no more moued with the examples of Muscouites Armenians Egyptians and Aethiopians then with the examples of Lutherans or Anabaptists and Caluinists for they are either heretiques or Schismatiques So that all Churches be they neuer so Catholique and ancient if they subscribe not to the now Romane Faith are eyther schismaticall or hereticall But let these men obserue what Rules they list let them brag of Antiquitie Vniuersalitie and Succession let them reiect the confessions of all Christian Churches but their owne yet shal they neuer be able to proue those vnwritten Traditions Apostolique and of equall authority with the Scriptures which contrary the doctrine of the Apostles or by consequence ouerthrowe the foundation of the written Word If the Apostle teach vs to pray with the spirit 1. Cor. 14. and to pray with the vnderstanding also how can prayer in an vnknowne tongue without vnderstanding be prooued a Tradition Apostolicall If the Apostle teach vs by the written Word that the Communion in both kinds extend to all beleeuers by the general words of Christ Drinke yee all of this How can the Communion in one kinde bee tearmed a Tradition Apostolical which imposeth the contrary on the Non Conficient Priest and the lay people Drinke ye none of this If the holy Spirit dictate by the mouth of an Apostle Search the Scriptures how can that doctrine be said to bee Apostolicall which inioynes the contrary to the lay people Search not the Scriptures If the written Word proclaime it for an Apostolike doctrine Vtrumque est maluÌ„ et nubere et vri imò â—eius est nubere quic quid reclameÌ„t aduersarii c. Bell. de Monach l. 2. c. 30. It is better marrie then burne how can that vnwritten Word bee tearmed a Tradition Apostolicall which teacheth the contrary It is better for a Priest to burne then marry If an Angel from heauen proclaime of the reall presence of Christs body He is risen he is not heere and the Apostle declares it for an Article of beliefe The Heauens containe him till his second comming How can the corporall and reall presence of Christ in the Sacrament be a Tradition Apostolicall which affirmeth that Christs body is conteined in the heauens and in a Pix at one and the same time If the Communion of the body and bloud of Christ be a common vnion of Priest and people and by the Apostles written Word Wee are all partakers of one Bread and one Cup how can Priuate Masse bee tearmed a Tradition Apostolicall wherein the Priest receiues the Bread and Cup alone without the people If God himselfe forbid by his Morall Law the worshipping of Images and the same Lawe stood in force with Christ and his Apostles how can that doctrine be made a poynt of Faith and termed a Tradition Apostolicall which on the contrary giues adoration to Images Lastly if an Angel from heauen forbids the worshipping of Angels by a particular instance in himselfe Worship not mee for I am thy fellow seruant How can it be reputed a Tradition Apostolicall and an Article of Faith Art 8. that the Saints reigning with Christ are to bee worshipped and prayed vnto These Papal Traditions vnwritten are different if not flatly opposite to the Word written and therefore I will say with Tertullian who answered the heretiques in his dayes Tert. praesc advers haeres c. 32. Their very doctrine it selfe being compared with the Apostolike by the diuersity and contrarietie thereof will pronounce that it had neither any Apostle for an Authour nor any man Apostolique Now if any Romanist shall take that poore exception and say their Tenets are not flat contrary to the Scriptures let him take his answere from Saint Chrysostome Non dixit si contraria annutiauerint aut si totuÌ„ Euangelium sub verterint sed si vel pauluÌ„ EuaÌ„gelizauerint prarer EuangeliuÌ„ qd accepistis etiaÌ„si quidvis labefactauerint Anathema sint Chrys in Galat. c. 1 Aug. in Ioh. Tra. 98 Saint Paul teacheth not saith hee if any man preach contrary to the Gospell or ouerthrow the whole Gospell but if they preach any little thing besides the Gospell hee hath receiued if hee ouerthrow any thing whatsoeuer it be let him be accursed I say therefore if this or the like vnwritten Traditions bee found praeterquà m or contraquà m either besides or contrary to the Scriptures as certainly most of their Traditions are I say it is impossible to reconcile them for Apostolike Traditions and consequently more absurd to equall them with the Scriptures and make them a partiall rule of faith for Although saith Tertullian Tertul. de praescâ— c. 26. the Apostles did deliuer some things vnto their domesticall friends as I may call them yet wee must not beleeue that they deliuered any such things as should bring in another rule of Faith different and repugnant to that which they generally propounded in publique as though they had preached one Lord in the Church another in their lodging To leaue therefore a certainty for an vncertaintie to forsake the written Word which is the safest and surest rule of beliefe for vnwritten Traditions which haue neither Antiquitie for their leader nor Vniuersality for their assurance nor Succession for their euidence this I say is Via dubia a doubtfull and vncertaine way this is Via Deuia a wandring and By-way SECT IX The Scriptures are a certaine safe and euident direction to the right way of Saluation and consequently to ground Faith vpon vnwritten Traditions is an obscure vncertaine and dangerous By-way I Confesse it for a trueth that in the first ages of the world the Ancients had the knowledge of God without writing and their memories by reason of their long liues were Registers instead of Bookes but afterwards when God had taken the posteritie of Iacob to bee his peculiar people the liues of men were shortned and therefore hee gaue them their lawes in writing which
Church viz. Antiquitie Vniuersalitie and Succession and therefore can bee no Catholike doctrine no Apostolique Tradition as is pretended in the third place The Communion in one kind is reputed a Tradition Apostolicall and receiued in the Roman Church for an Article of Faith yet this doctrine wants Antiquitie Vniuersalitie and Succession Touching Antiquitie It is the confession of the Councell of Constance where the Cup was taken from the people that Christ did institute in both kinds Concil Const 1414. and the Primitiue Church did continue it to the faithfull in both kinds And Alphonsus à Castro tells vs Alphons à Castr cont â—aeres li. 6. that anciently for many ages the Communion in both kindes was vsed among all Catholiques Touching Vniuersalitie Cassander witnesseth Satis compertum est vniuersaleÌ„ Christi EcclesiaÌ„ mille ampliùs Cassand Consult de vtraque specie that the vniuersall Church at this day and the Romane Church for more then a thousand yeeres after Christ did exhibite the Sacrament in both kinds as it is most euident by innumerable testimonies both of Greeke and Latine Fathers Touching Succession In later ages Salmeron the Iesuite professeth Salmer Tract 35. It was the generall custome for lay people to communicate vnder both kinds as at this day it is vsed among the Grecians and was vsed in times past among the Corinthians and in Africa And Ieremie the Oecumenicall Patriarch returnes this answere to the defenders of the Faith in both kindes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Patr. resp 1. c. 21. Dicitis you say that all ought to communicate vnder both kinds and you say well for we do so when we participate of the venerable mysteries Cassand Liturg. c. 11 p. 28. Franciscus Aluarez tells vs that in the kingdome of Prester Iohn they vse in their Church to make a cake of honey meale and oyle and powre wine into the cup and all that communicate of the body of Christ communicate also of the Cup. The Christians in Armenia Idem Liturg c. 14. p 32. after they haue communicated with bread in lieu of the cup by reason there is no wine in India they take dried grapes and put them into water and before the time they are to communicate they presse them and straine them and vse that liquor instead of wine This doctrine therefore wants the requisite conditions of Antiquitie Vniuersalitie and Succession and therefore can be no Article of Faith no Apostolique Tradition as is presented in the fourth place Transubstantiation TRansubstantiation is reputed a Tradition Apostolicall and receiued in the Romane Church for an Article of Faith yet this doctrine if you respect the name or nature of it wants Antiquitie Vniuersalitie and Succession In Primitiuâ Ecclesiâ de substaÌ„tia fidei erat corpus Christi sub speciebê° coÌ„tineri tamen non erat de fide substantiam panisin corpus Christi coÌ„uerti c. Io. Yribarne in 4. d. 11. q. 3. disp 42. Vnum addit Scotus quod minimeprobandum qd ante Lateranense CoÌ„cilium non fuisset dogma fidei Bell. li. 3. de Euch. c. 23. Touching Antiquitie It is the confession of learned Yribarne In the Primitiue Church it was beleeued for a poynt of faith that the body of Christ was contained vnder the formes of bread and wine but it was not beleeued as a matter of faith that after consecratition the substance of the bread was conuerted into the body of Christ And their learned Scotus professeth that before the Councell of Lateran which was twelue hundred yeeres after Christ Transubstantiation was not beleeued as a poynt of faith Touching Vniuersalitie Eusebius a Greek Father paraphrasing vpon the words of Christ The words which I speake vnto you are spirit and life deliuers this doctrine flat contrary to Transubstantiation 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Euseb l. 3. Eccl. Theol. cont Marcel Ancyr M ss in Oxon. Bibli publicâ Doe not thinke that I speake of that flesh wherewith I am compassed as if you must eat of that neither imagine that I command you to drinke my sensible and bodily blood but vnderstand well the words which I haue spoken vnto you are spirit and life And Saint Chrisostom a principall member of the Greeke Church in his Epistle written to Caesarius hath these wordes Etiamsi natura panis in ipso permansit Chrys ad Caesarium Monachum As before the bread be sanctified we call it bread but when Gods grace hath sanctified it by the meanes of the Priest it is deliuered from the name of bread and is reputed worthy the name of the Lords body although the nature of the bread remaine still in it And to preuent that grosse opinion that after consecration there remaine onely the shewes and accidents of bread and wine Theodoret concludeth against the heretique with this Catholique doctrine 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Theod in Dial. 2. Inconf The mysticall signes after the consecration depart not from their owne nature for they remaine in their former substance Euphraemius Patriarch of Antioch giues his ioynt assent with vs flatly against the doctrine of Transubstantiation hee tells vs Ephrae de sacr Antio legibus lib. 1. in Phocij Biblioâ—hecâ Cod. 229. The Sacrament of the body of Christ doeth neither depart from his sensible substance and yet remaineth vndiuided from intelligible grace and Baptisme being wholly made spirituall and remaining one doth retaine the propertie of his sensible substance of water I meane and yet loseth not that which it is made This holy Father by comparing the Sacraments together doth demonstrate the faith of both and as hee prooues that in the Sacrament of Baptisme the substance of water still remaineth after consecration which both Papists and Protestants acknowledge in like maner saith he the substance of bread remaines in the Sacrament of the Eucharist after consecration which the Protestants confesse and the Papists deny To omit many other proofes touching the vniversalitie of our doctrine let Pope Gelasius bee heard for the Catholike doctrine of the Romane Church in his time Gelas cont Eutich An Image or similitude saith hee of the body and blood of Christ is celebrated in the action of the mysteries It is therefore apparant and euident enough that wee must hold the same opinion of Christ the Lord which we professe celebrate and receiue in his image that as those signes by the working of the holy Ghost passe into the diuine substance and yet remaine in the proprietie of their owne nature euen so that very principall mysterie it selfe whose force and trueth that Image assuredly representeth doeth demonstrate one whole and true Christ to continue the two natures of which he consisteth properly remaining And that wee might the bettter vnderstand what he meant by those wordes viz. The signes still abide in the proprietie of their owne nature hee expoundeth himselfe in these words which vtterly ouerthrow the doctrine of Transubstantiation Non desinit esse substantia vel
natura panis vini the substance or nature of bread ceaseth not or perisheth not Thus briefly I haue giuen you a taste of the generall doctrine of the Fathers in the first ages who publikely professed the Protestant Faith that the Eucharist was altogether a spirituall food and that the nature of bread and the very substance of bread did remaine after consecration Touching Succession To let passe many Writers of eminent note in the Romane Church who in the later ages opposed Transubstantiation as namely Bertram Aelfrick Rupertus Rabanus Maurus and diuers others who were neuer condemned by their owne Church Looke vpon the doctrine of the Greeke Church and you shall find they haue kept the ancient faith of the Sacrament successiuely from their Predecessors Pope Eugenius after hee had answered the Grecians at the Councell of Florence that hee was well satisfied by them touching the Procession of the holy Ghost Operae pretium est vt de Purgatorio igne de summo Pontificis principatu et de Azimo et fermeÌ„tato pane agamus vt omni ex parte coniunctio nostra sit absoluta Con. Florent Sess 25. tells them further it was well worth the labour to treat of other points in difference as namely of Purgatorie of the Supremacie of Leauened bread and of Transubstantiation that their agreement might stand absolute in all respects If Transubstantiation and the other poynts of doctrine had bin successiuely receiued with the vniforme consent of the Greeke Church there had needed no reconciliation at that time betweene the Easterne and Westerne Churches for those Tenets and that wee might yet farther vnderstand the difference betwixt them was great in this very question Marcus the Archbishop of Ephesus speaking of the Romane Masse Casaub answ to the Ep. of C. Peron p. 42. affirmes It is manifestly repugnant to the Expositions and interpretations which wee haue receiued by Tradition and to the words of our Lord and to the meaning of those words And those which defend the Romane Rites concerning this matter the same Marcus pronounceth that they deserue to bee pitied both in regard of their double ignorance and their profound sottishnes It is true 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Greeke Church doth hold there is a mysticall transmutation in the Sacrament but withall they deny a Transubstantiation they deny that any alteration is made by the wordes of consecration which is the generall Tenet of the Roman Church nay more they call it bread after the words of Consecration are vttered Touching the first Salmeron the Iesuite speaking in the person of the Grecians deliuers their opinion in this maner Dan. ChaÌ„ Panstr lib. 6 de Euch. c. 7 Forasmuch as the Benediction is not superfluous or vaine neither gaue Christ simply bread it followeth that when he gaue it the transmutation was already made and those words This is my body did demonstrate what was conteined in the bread not what was made by them De diuino denique sacrificio quaesitum est â latinis quomodò prolatuÌ„ Christi verbù accipite et comedite hoc est enim corpê° meuÌ„ vos haÌ„c posteà orationem additis dicentes Et fac quidem hunc panem pretiosum corpus Christi tui sancto tuo spiritu transmutans Concil Florent Sess 25. p. 595. Binius This confession is agreeable to that question the Romanists put to the Grecians at the Councell of Florence viz. Why they vsed to pray after the words of Consecration in this manner Make this bread the precious Bodie of Christ and so call it bread after Consecration To which the Grecians made answere Wee confesse by these words This is my body 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the bread is consecrated which Binius most falsely hath translated Transubstantiated and becomes the body of Christ and wee pray that the holy Ghost may descend vpon vs and change the bread and make it the body of Christ to vs to the spirituall food of our soules Transubstantiari And that wee may know what is meant by that change or transmutation in the Sacrament Binius in Conc. Flor. Sess 25. p. 695. the Patriarch tells vs The body and blood of Christ are truely mysteries Patr Resp 1 ca. 10. 13. not that these 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 are changed into humane flesh but we into them And for further confirmation of our doctrine that it is not the reall and substantiall flesh of Christ which is offered but the Sacrament of his flesh Nec data est tâ—c â—aro Domini quaÌ„ gestebat Apostolis comedenda neque sanguis bibeÌ„dus nec etiam nunc in sacro hoc ritu descendit Dominicum corpus de coelo 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 blasphemia enim hoc esset patr Resp 1 cap. 10. de Coenâ Domini hee tells vs The flesh of Christ which hee carried about him was not giuen to his Apostles to bee eaten nor his blood to bee drunke neither doth the body of our Lord at this day descend from heauen in the Sacrament for this saith hee were blasphemy And certainely if neither Christs Bodie in which hee suffered nor his body glorified be present in the Sacrament as this Patriarch professeth there can bee no corporall no reall and substantiall presence of that or any other body and consequently no Transubstantiation no Article of Faith no Apostolique Tradition as is pretended in the fift place Prayer in an vnknowne tongue PRayer and Seruice in an vnknown tongue is a Tradition of the Romane Church and reputed of equall authoritie with the Scripture yet this doctrine wants Antiquitie Vniuersality and Succession Touching Antiquitie Cassander tells vs Cassan Liturg c. 28. The Canonicall prayers especially the words of Consecration of the body and blood of Christ the ancient Fathers did so reade it that all the people might vnderstand it and say Amen And it is the confession of Mr. Harding to Bishop Iewel Iewel in 3. Aâ—t Diuâ—s 28. Verily in the primitiue Church prayer and seruice in a knowne tongue was necessary when faith was a learning and therefore the prayers were made then in a common tongue knowne to the people for cause of their instruction And Card. Bellarmine professeth Bell. de ver Dei l. 2. c. 16 that all the people in the first ages in the time of diuine Seruice did answere one Amen as vnderstanding the Priest and ioyning with him in prayer Touching Vniuersalitie It was the custome of the ancient Church as appeareth by the Popes Decretals whereby it was publiquely proclaimed Decr. Greg. lib. tit 31. de offic Iud. Ord. ca. 14. Wee command that the Bishops of such cities and Diocesses where nations are mingled together prouide meet men to minister the holy Seruice according to the diuersitie of their maners and languages Touching Succession Bellarmine confesseth Bell. de ver Dei l. 2. c. 16. that the custome of celebrating diuine Seruice in a knowne tongue
redeeme those punishments by our owne labours Idem ibid. Resp lest we also should seeme to be our owne Redeemers But Pope Iulius the fourth and the Councell of Trent saith the Cardinall most plainly teach the contrary Gelasius Bishop of Rome in the yeere 492 professeth and declareth for an Article of his beliefe In the Sacrament is celebrated an Image Gelas cont Futych Nest or semblance of the body and blood of Christ and there ceaseth not to bee the substance or nature of bread and wine On the contrary Pope Innocentius the Third decreed it for an Article of faith in the Councell of Lateran with a Firmiter credimus Wee stedfastly beleeue Lib. 1. Decret cap. Firmitèr credimus that the body and blood of Christ are truely contained in the Sacrament of the Altar the bread being transubstantiated into his body and wine into his blood by the diuine power so that there must be really verily and substantially present the naturall body and blood of Christ which was conceiued of the Virgin Mary and which is ascended into Heauen Touching the Communion in both kind the same Gelasius proclaimed to the communicants of his time Aut integra Sacramenta percipiant aut ab integris arceantur Gelas de Consecr Dist 2 CoÌ„perimus §. Either let them receiue the whole Sacrament or let them be driuen from the whole for the diuiding of one and the same Sacrament cannot be done without great sacriledge On the contrary in this latter age Pope Martin the Fifth hath decreed it with the consent of a whole Councell Conc. Constant Sess 13. If any shall obstinately maintaine that it is vnlawfull or erronious to receiue in one kind hee ought to bee punished and driuen out as an Heretike Gregorie the Great Bishop of Rome about the yeere 600 publisheth his instruction for the people touching Images Epist ex Regist lib. 9. cap. 9. Let the children of the Church now dispersed be called togeather and taught by the Testimonies of the Scriptures that nothing made with hands may be worshipped And withall concludes If any will make Images forbid them not but by all meanes let him avoyd the adoration of them On the contrary in this later age Pope Pius the fourth declares it for an Article of Faith I most firmely auouch Bulla Pij 4. Art 9. that the Images of Christ and the Mother of God alwayes a Virgin and other Saints are to bee had and retained and that due honour and veneration is to bee giuen to their Images Againe touching the vse and sufficiencie of the Scripture Sect 13. touching the Reall presence Priuate Masse Communion in both kindes Merite of workes the Popes Supremacie and the like Gregory is flatly opposite to the Popes of these later times And that you may yet further heare that the Popes haue no Infallibility in their Determinations and Decrees you shall find likewise that the later Popes doe not onely vary from the Faith of the Ancients but also differ amongst themselues and contradict each other in many substantiall poynts of their owne doctrine Pope Caelestine the Third in the yeere 1191 published a Decree Alph. aduers haeres lib. 1. c. 4. that of maried persons if one fall into Heresie the Marriage is dissolued and the Catholike partie is free to marrie againe Neither saith Alphonsus was this errour of Calestine such as ought to bee imputed to negligence alone that wee may say hee erred as a priuate man not as Pope for this difinition of Caelestine was extant in the Decretals which I my selfe haue seene and read On the contrary Pope Innocentius the Third his immediate Successor decided the case and confessed that one of his Predecessors which saith the Glosse Decret li. 4. de diuortijs Quanto §. Praedecess was Caelestine had decreed otherwise whose resolution was in the olde Decretals and it was euill that Caelestine said Pope Gregorie the Ninth in the yeere 1227 proclaimeth it to the world Greg. Ep ad Germ. Archiep Constant apud M Paris in Henr. 3. The not knowing the Scriptures by the testimonie of trueth it selfe is the occasion of errours and therefore it is expedient for all men to reade or heare the same On the contrary Pope Clement the Eighth forbids all the common people yea â—id Regulars also to reade or retaine any vulgar Translation of the Scriptures without licence of their Bishop or Inquisitor and there hee giues the reason flatly opposite to the Teneâ— of his Predecessor Azor Inst Moral part 1. l. 8. c. 26. Because the common vse of Scripture is found by experience to bee rather hurtfull then profitable Pope Nicholas the fourth in the yeare 1288 declared in his Decretall Sixti Decr. lib. 5. tit 12. §. Exijt that To renounce the proprietie of all things not in speciall onely but in common also is meritorious and holy which Christ taught by Word and confirmed by Example and the first Founders of the Militant Church deriued to others by paterne of their Doctrine and Life On the contrarie his Successor Iohn the 22. published and declared Extrauag â—ohn 2 tit 14 § Cum inter nonnullos that It is Hereticall to affirme that Christ and his Apostles had nothing in speciall nor in common Pope Martin the fifth in the yeare 1431. in the grand Councell of Basil Conc. Basil Sess 33. decreed the Councell aboue the Pope Pope Eugenius the fourth Bell de Eccles CoÌ„cil l. 1. c. 7. his immediate Successor condemned that Session declared the Pope to bee aboue a Councell And that which is most remarkeable those Romanists which condemne the Translation of our Bible as if the latter Translation did contradict the former shall finde The first Bible was printed at Rome 1590 the second 1592. that Pope Sixtus Quintus published in the yeere 1590 and commanded to be read and followed vpon such pain 〈◊〉 as are mentioned in his Breue D. Iames his Apol. of Belluâ—n Papale p 27. within two yeere after was reiected by hiâ— Successor Pope Clement 〈◊〉 8. as a Translation erronious Acta prioruÌ„ Pontificum sequentes Pontifiâ—es aut infringunt iut omnino tollunt nihil enim aliud isli Pontificuli cogitabant quam vt nomeÌ„ et dignitatem maâ—oruÌ„ suorum extinguerent Plat in Stephan in Romano and opposite to thâ— Truth And thus saith â—â—tina The latter Popes eitheâ— viâ—lat or vtterly repeale thâ— Decrees of their Predecessors For the little pettie Popes haâ— no other study to busie themselues withall but onely to defuce the name and dignitie 〈◊〉 the former Popes First then wee may obserue that the ancient Bishops of Rome published and declared the same faith and doctrine which the Protestants teach in the fundamentall poynts at this day They commaunded Priests and people to communicate together contrary to the doctrine of Priuaâ— Masses they taught that the Sacrament was a semblance of Christs body
performe an act meritorious The beliefe then of the Romish doctrine doeth not consist altogether in the trueth of it but in the faith of the beleeuer for let it be true or false if it bee receiued with an affected ignorance and a blinde obedience the partie shall be safe as it were by fire that is as they elegantly vnderstand it shall goe through the fire of Purgatory to heauen Cardinall Cusanus hath giuen his voice with Cardinal Tollet that it is the safest and surest way to relie vpon the Priest as Ruler of the people without further inquirie of the trueth and thereupon he cries out with admiration as if hee would astonish his Disciples with the name of the Church QuaÌ„ firma est aedificatio Ecclesiae quia nemo decipi potest etiam per maluÌ„ praesidentem Si dixeris Domine obediui tibi in praeposito hoc tibi sufficiet ad salutem tu enim per obedientiam quam facis praeposito queÌ„ Ecclesia â—olerat decipi nequis etiaÌ„si praeceperit alia quaÌ„ debuit praesumit enim ecclesia de illa sententia cui si tu obedieris magna erit meâ—ces tuâ— Obedeenâ—â—â—t â—tur irrâ—â—tionalis est coâ— suâ—mâ—ta obedientia et per fectissima scil quando obeditur sine inquisitione rationis sicut tumentuÌ„ obedit domino suo Cusan Exist lib. 2. lib. 6. O how strong is the building of the Church for no man can be deceiued no not by an euill Bishop if thou say vnto God O Lord I haue obeyed thee in my Bishop this shall suffice thee vnto saluation for thou canst not bee deceiued by thy obedience that thou yeeldest to the Bishop whom the Church suffereth although hee commaund thee other things then he ought to doe for the Church presumeth his sentence to bee good which sentence if thou obey thy reward shall bee great Obedience therefore without reason is a full and perfect obedience that is when thou obeyest without inquiring of reason as a horse is obedient to his Master The Bishop or Priest then is the man we must obey and beleeue for his lips preserue knowledge his tongue will tell no lies but what if hee faile in his doctrine what if hee erre in his opinion are we sure he doeth euer deliuer the constant Tenet of his Church Admit then Saint Bernard were aliue and if a poore ignorant soule should come vnto him and demand of him whether hee thinke it possible for a man to keepe the Commandements will he say that a man may keep them for the Church teacheth so Bernard in Can. Serm. 50. when as he himself confidently affirmeth Therin thou shalt yeeld vnto vs that the Commaundements neither haue been fulfilled by any man in this life nor indeed can bee Admit that Thomas Aquinas were aliue and one of his disciples should desire to be resolued what worship to giue an Image would he tell him it must be worshipped with Dulia an inferiour honour when as himselfe protesteth Quod eâdeÌ„ reuerentia exhibeatur Imagini Christi vt ipsi Christo Aquin. p. 3. q. 25. art 3. that the Image of Christ is to bee honoured with the same honour that Christ himselfe is Admit that Cardinal Caietan were aliue and one should desire to know whether the Bookes of Macabees were canonical Scriptures would hee teach they were Canonicall when his fellow Canus professeth Canus li. 2. loc Theol. cap. 11. hee was so farre from teaching it that hee maintained the contrary Looke vpon the grand fundamental point of Transubstantiation if a Romanist will consult with the Priests and Bishops of these late ages it will appeare there could be no certaintie for an ignorant lay man to build his faith vpon the resolution of his Priest or Prelate As for instance in this particular poynt If a lay Papist had required satisfaction of Bishop Fisher Whether the doctrine of Transubstantiation was grouÌ„ded vpon the authoritie of the Scripture it is presumed he would haue answered according to his owne writing Roffens contr Capt. BabylonicaÌ„ c. 10. N. 8. O. Non potest per vllam Scripturam probare It cannot bee proued by any place of Scripture If hee had appealed from the Bishop to a Court of Cardinals Cardinall de Aliaco would haue told him Patet quod ille modê° sit possibilis nec repugnat rationi nec authoritati Bibliae c. Pet. de Alliac in 4. Sent. q. 6. Art 1. Caier in 3. part q. 79. Art 1. The maner which supposeth the substance of bread to remaine is possible neither is it contrary to reason nor the authoritie of the Scriptures Card. Caietan would haue told him That part which the Gospell hath not expressed wee haue receiued expresly from the Church viz. the conuersion of the bread and wine into the body and blood of Christ Card. Bellarmine would haue told him It is not altogether improbable that there is no expresse place of Scripture to prooue it Bellar. de Euch. lib. 3. cap. 23. and it may iustly bee doubted whether the Text bee cleare enough to inforce it Againe admit an ignorant lay man would require the iudgement of particular Priests in former ages Bertram a Priest would haue told him Bertr of the body and blood of Christ ann 1623. In respect of the substance of the creatures looke whatsoeuer they were before Consecration they are euen the same after Bellar. de Euch. l. 5. c. 15. Peter Lombard and Aquinas would haue told him that the Sacrament of the Altar was a commemoratiue sacrifice because it communicated the effects of the real killing of Christ Ante Lateranense CoÌ„cilium non fuit dogma fidei Scot. in 4. Sent. dist 11. q. 3. Scotus would haue told him Transubstantiation was not beleeued as a point of faith before the Councel of Lateran about 400 yeeres agoe Durand would haue told him The materiall part of the consecrated bread was not conuerted Durand 4. d. 11. q. 1. Bell. de Euchar. lib. 3. cap. 13. All these were Priests and members of the Romane Church they were Defenders of the Roman Faith in their times they declared by their Writings and Instructions to the people that doctrine which was altogether different if not flatly opposite to the Tenet of the now Roman Church And from hence it will follow that either the Roman Church doth want that Vnitie in poynts of Faith which they so much magnifie amongst themselues or otherwise it is an vnstable and a doubtfull way to relie vpon the instructions of his Bishop or Priest for the assurance of his right beliefe Moreouer that the Cardinals Bishops maintained a different doctrine from their owne Church it will appeare by the seuerall confessions confutations of their own Church-men Touching Bertram Bellar. de Script Eccles Tom. 7 p 121. Bellarmine saith Paschasius Ratbertus liuing at that time wrote a booke against him and confuted his errour Touching Peter Lombard
and that the substance of bread did remaine after consecration contrary to the Faith of Transubstantiation they commanded the cup to bee giuen to the lay people which the later Popes forbid at this day They condemned the Worship of Images Merit of works and the Popes Supremacie all which doctrines are receiued by the later Popes and councels and declared with Anathema's to bee beleeued as Articles of faith Thus wee see the house diuided against it selfe Heu Domus antiqua quaÌ„ dispari dominaris Domino the later Popes repealing the Acts of the former and both contradicting each other Now how the house should stand which is diuided against it selfe how the Pope should be the Rule of faith and yet dissent from the faith of his Predecessours how the Pope should bee the Pillar and ground of Trueth and yet his Trueth opposed and contradicted by his Successors I may well conceiue it may be A mystery of Babylon Reuel 17.5 but I professe I cannot vnderstand it Briefly and truly I may say of the Popes in these later ages They haue succeeded their predecessors as Caiphas succeeded Aaron or as sickenesse succeedeth health or as darknesse succeedeth light from these few examples in Faith and Doctrine I will conclude with the saying of St. Ambrose Non habent Petri hareditutem qui Petri fidem non habent Ambros de Paenit l. 1. c. 6 They haue not the succession of Peter that want the faith of Peter I proceed to the Popes Succession in person which although it be of no force and authoritie by the testimonies of our aduersaries vnlesse there be also a right succession of doctrine in the same Church yet I wil giue you some few instances and obseruations of their owne Writers that the vncertaintie of their Succession may more easily bee discouered by their owne confessions Gratian the Compiler of the Popes Decrees well vnderstood that the Popes succession would bee interrupted if his faith and doctrine should bee compared with Peters and therfore for more certaintie by transposing the word Faith into Scate hath appropriated the right Succession to the Sea of Rome Petri haereditatem non habent que non habent Petri sedeÌ„ Grat. de Poenit dist 1. c. Potest in these words They haue not the Succession of Peter that want the Seat of Peter To let passe these forgeries it is strange to see what shifts the Romanists doe vse to make good the lineal descent of their Popes Rather then they will want authoritie of Scriptures to proue Peters being at Rome they wil confesse that Rome is meant by that Babylon Annot. vpon the Rhemish Testament 1. Pet. c. 5. v. 13. which is spoken of in the 16 and 17 of the Reuelation which without doubt is the Seat of Antichrist Besides they are not agreed among themselues whether Linus or Clemens or Cletus QuidaÌ„ post PetruÌ„ immediatè ponunt Clementem vt Tertullianê° et Hieronymê° alii post Petrum ponunt LinuÌ„ posteà Clemente in c. Bell. de Rom. Pont. l. 2. c. 5 or Anacletus succeeded Peter if he were at Rome Neither can they well resolue whether the Pope should succeed St. Peter or St. Iohnâ— for St. Iohn liued 33 yeeres after St. Peter saith Baronius so that the succession must bee either deriued from St. Iohn the suruiuour or else the Pope who immediately succeeded St. Peter must bee greater then an Apostle during the time of Saint Iohns suruiuourship Quae tuÌ„ facies sanctae Rom. Ecclesiae quaÌ„ foedissima cum Romae dominareÌ„tur potentissimae aeque ac sordidissimae meretrices quoruÌ„ arbitrio mutareÌ„tur sedes darentur Episcopi et qd horrenduÌ„ et nefanduÌ„ est intruderentur in sedeÌ„ Petri earuÌ„ Amasii Pseudopontifices qui non sint nisi ad consignaÌ„da tempora in Catalogo Pontificum scripti Baron Annal. in ann 912. But admit that St. Peter was at Rome admit the ancient Bishops of Rome did rightly succeed Saint Peter yet What was the face of the Roman Church saith Baronius and how most filthie did it appeare when the most impotent and base Queanes bare all the sway at Rome changed Sees and gaue Bishoprickes aâ— at their pleasure and which is most abominable and not to be named intruded their Paramours into Peters Chaire false Bishops whose names are written in the Catalogue of Popes onely to note and designe the times To passe by the two and twenty Schismes in the Papacie wherein it was questionable betwixt the Popeâ— and Anti-Popes who were the true Successors of Peter To let passe the vacancie in the Papall Sea for many moneths and yeeres during which time the Pope fare at Auinium left the Sea of Rome Their owne Genebrard confesseth there were fiftie Popes irregular Apostatici Apotactici Genebr Chron l 4. disordered and Apostaticall And Bellarmine tells vs at the Councell of Constance Bell de RoÌ„ Pont. li. 4. c. 14. there were three Popes neither could it easily bee resolued which of them was the true and legitimate Pope Dubius Papa habetur pro non Papa Bell. de Concil l. 2. cap. 19. And saith he A doubtfull Pope stands for no Pope If then there were false Popes by Baronius confession if Apostaticall Popes by Genebrards confession if doubtfull and consequently no Popes by Bellarmins confession what certainty what assurance can these men haue of the Popes personall Succession It was a pertinent and full answer made to a Iesuite by an acute learned Doctor of our Church touching the personall succession of D. Featly in his answere to a Iesuit touching personall Succession the Pope If by Bishops you vnderstand rightly consecrated and canonically elected inuested Pope Pelagius the first was not so for he was not ordained by three Bishops Pope Hildebrand was not so who held the Papacie by an Imposture nor Syluester who aspired to it by Magicke nor Eugenius who was first promoted by faction and afterwards held it in despight of the Councell of Basil Again If by true Bishops you meane Orthodoxall Bishops preachers of the the truth Pope Liberius was not such for he was branded with the note of Arianisme by St. Hierome and Pope Damasus Pope Honorius was not such for he was condemned for the heresie of the Monothelites in three Generall Councells confirmed by three Popes Iohn the 23. was not such who was charged in the Councell of Constance with the denyall of the immortality of the Soule the life to come and for that and other blasphemous crimes was deposed by the Councell Alphonsus a Castro was an obedient seruant to the Pope QuaÌ„uis credere teneamur ex fide veruÌ„ Petri successorem esse supremum totius Ecclesiae pastorem non tamen tenemur eadeÌ„ fide credere LeoneÌ„ aut Clementem esse veruÌ„ Petri successoreÌ„ quoniam noÌ„ tenemur ex fide Catholicâ credere eorum queÌ„libet ritè et canonicè fuisse electum Alph. lib. 1.