Aug. lib. 2. cont Crescon cap. 26. to 7. Apoc. 22. v. 8. c. 19. v 10. S. August q. 61. in Gen. â—â— 4. Genes 29. v. 24. sinneth therin greeuously but the people worshiping erroniously vpon inuincible ignorance offend no more then did S. Ihon when he worshiped an Angel as God thinking as saith S. Austin it had bene God him self or as did Iacob when he lay with Lia who was not his wife thinking verely it had bene his wife Rachel But to say that there is no consecration when the Priest omitteth any word at al or miscalleth any words so as the sense be not altered thereby is not Catholique doctrin but Bels vsual false dealing 9. His last contradiction is that vvhen pag. 34. many Priests are made together in Rome they al pronounce the vvords of consecration This is true but what then Papists saith he can not tel hovv many Gods or hovv many times God is made in a peece of bread O accusator fratrum Where didest thou heare of many Gods amongest Papists Where of making of God we say after S. Hierom and S. S. Hieron eâ—ist ad Helâ—odor S. Pontian epist 1. Decretali Pontian that Priests conficiuni Corpus Christi make Christs body but dreame not of making God These be the slanders malitiously obiected to Catholikes against thine owne knowledge and Conscience But where is the contradiction Forsooth because Inocentius hâ—ldeth that al such Priests do consecrate Durand thinketh that he only who first pronounceth the words and Caietan is of an other opinion I graunt these contradict one an other But what is this to the Massâ— are these contradictions in it You promised to shew vs Bel deceaueth his Reader contradictions in â—he Masse and twise you haue told vs of durand Caietans contradictions as often of other matters which had no shew of Contradiction Besides that the matter in which these three Authors contradict one an other is no point of faith For with Catholiques it is no more matter of faith whether al the said Priests or one only consecrate then it is with Protestants whither al or one should christen a child if many at once should dippe him into the font pronounce the words of Baptisme So the letter be wel sealed it skilleth not whither one or many be thought to make the print when many together put their hands to the seale 10. But if Bel when he looked vpon the Masse booke had looked on his communion booke and with the like eyes and affection Gilby admonition to England and Scotland fol. 70. he should haue found other stuffe in it then he did in the Masse For besyde that it is made out of our breuiary and Missal wherupon Gilby called King Edward the sixt his booke an English mattins patched forth of the Popes Portesse more then a thousand Ministers whome the vniuersity of Oxford acknowledged to be Ansvver to the PetitioÌ„ their brethren and fellow laborers in the Lords haruest in their petition exhibited Exhibited in April 1603. to his Maiesty say that they groan vnder a burden of humaine rites and ceremonies finde enormities in their Church discipline A thousand ministers censure of the communion booke and in their Churches seruice want of vniformity of doctrin Popish opinions and honor prescribed to the name of Iesus with diuers abuses which they are able say they to shew not to be agreable to Scripture Thus Syr haue your owne ministers deminished the credit of your communion booke And Reynolds an excellent ornament saith Ansvver to 8. reasons Confer p. 63. 86. pag. 25. pag. 59. Buckley in the conference at Hampton court 1. proued the communion booke to contradict twise the Byble the Bishops were faine to amend it 2. he argued it to contradict the 25. Article of their faith 3. to conteyne manifest errors directly repugnant to Scripture 4. he requested it to be pag. 23. fitted to more encrease of piety 5. professeth that vrging men to subscribe vnto it pag. 58. is a great impeachment to a learned ministery wherof he giueth diuers reasons as the repugnancy therin to Scripture the corruption of Scripture the interrogatories and ceremonies in baptisme and certayne D. Râ—inolds censure of the communion booke words in matrimony Thus syr the excellent ornament of your Church hath adorned your communion booke and this black verdict hath he giuen therof 11. And if I should but reckon the contradictions Protestants contradictioÌ„s about their communion in Protestants doctrin about the Eucharist I shold neuer make an end only I wil requite Bel with some few 1. how Christs body saith Willet shold be verily 1. VVillet Tetrostyl col 2. part 3. p. 82. present and yet not really Can there be verum and not res or ens vere and not realiter 2. how there can be a real presence 2. Perkins Reform Cath. p. 185. 189. of Christ in the Sacrament as saith Perkins and yet Christ no otherwise present then a thing to it name 3 How God giueth Christ 3. Perkins sup in this Sacrament saith the same Minister as really and truly as any thing can be giuen to man and yet he is giuen by only faith 4. 4. Caluin 4. instit c. 17. paragr 10. How as Caluin teacheth the Eucharist is no empty signe but hath the verity of the thing vnited to it and yet Christ is only in heauen 5. How there is saith Caluin 5. Caluin sup parag 19. 15. a true and substantial communication of Christs body and blood in the Eucharist and yet Christ no more there then he was 6. Sainctes de Euchar. repetit 6. c. 1. p. 208. Mich. Fabrit ep de Beza in the Sacraments of the Iews which were before his body was any substance 6. How Christs body is truely really and substancially in the Eucharist as Beza wrote in his confession exhibited to the Count Palatine and vttered publikly in the disputation at Surius An. 1556. Poysi and yet withal as far from the Eucharist as heauen from earth Surely such fellows as these haue yea no in their religion 2. Cor. 1. v. 17. 2. Cor. 4. v. 2. or els walking in craftines adulterat as the Apostle speaketh Gods worde For if their words be vnderstood as they signify purport they include manifest contradiction and thus much of the second Article VVherfore be myndful Apotal Bel from wheÌ„ce thou are fallen and do penance Apoc. 2. THE THIRD ARTICLE OF THE POPES DISPENSATIONS CHAP. I. BEL beginneth this Article as he did Bel pag. 36. the two former with vntruthes and dissimulatioÌ„s His vntruths appeare in that he chargeth S. Antonin and Austin of Ancona Antonin 3. part tit 22. c. 5. parag 8. vntruth 42. vntruth 43. with teaching the Pope to haue equal powre with God Because S. Antonin writeth That seeing the Pope is Christs vicar none can lawfully withdraw him self from his
impossible Wherefore what some say that Clergie men be exempted from the power of Princes is not to be vnderstood vniuersally but of their coactiue power which they haue to punishe the laity And of late Bilson Superintendent of Winton confessed to certeine Catholiques if I be not misinformed that the King is but a ceremonial head that is either a head onely for fasshion sake or onely in matters of ceremonies not in al ecclesiastical causes And albeit they subscribe Supplicat to the King in April 1603. to the supremacie yet perhaps they doe that onely in respect of time as a thousand ministers testifie that diuerse of them did to the communion booke some vpon protestation some vpon exposition some with condicion albeit it conteyned as they say enormities and abuses not agreable to Scriptures rather forsooth then the Church should be depriued of their labours but in deede rather then they shoulde be depriued of the Churches lyuings 3. The true difference therfore betwixt Catholiques and English Protestants if these durst vtter their mindes as strangers doe would not be whether the Prince or Pope but whether the Pope or ministers ought to be head of the Church wherein I appeale to any indifferent mans iudgement whether be more agreable to Gods word that the successour of S. Peter vpon Matth. 16. Ioan. 21. whome Christ built his church and committed his sheepe vnto should be head of the Church or they who are successours to none but beginners of them selues who as S. Ciprian writeth no man creating them Cyprian lib. de simpl praelat Bishopes made them selues Bishopes And wether be more secure to Princes that he should be accounted head of Gods Church Constant in edicto Constant 5. Phocas Iustinian C. de summa Trinit l. vlt. Valentinianus epist ad Theodosisi See cap. 6. parag 6. 7. Conference p. 79. 4. and 20. whom the whole Christian world hath euer acknowledged for such and vnder Whome the mightiest Monarches haue and doe liue as securely as any Protestant Prince whatsoeuer or they who if they were permitted would erect such a Presbitrie as agreeth with a Monarchy no better then the diuel with God who haue kept Kings without state and honor c. and of whom some beardles boies haue braued Kings to their faces and excommunicated them when they came within ther parish CHAP. III. The opinion of Protestants touching deposition of Princes LIKWISE touching the deposition Germany Luther See Surius An. 1525. ProdromuÌ„ Staphil p. 75. of Princes Luther as Sleidan testifieth wrote to Princes That subiects neither cold nor would nor ought any longer to suffer ther gouerment And benig asked his opinion touching the league of Protestans against their Emperor Charles 5. answered Because at this time so Sleidon l. 8. Sur. An. 1531. doubtful perilous many things may hapen that not only right it selfe but necessity of consience may reach vs weapons we may make league for defence whither the Emperor him selfe or any other make war And a litle before his death said VVho Sur. An. 1546. taks not armes whils he may vseth not things giuen him by God And the Protestant Princes in their rebellion against the Emperor set forh Proclamation wherein they write Because the Emperor endeauoreth to dostroy religion Sleidon l. â—â— liberty he giueth vs cause to assaile him with good conscience And againe we renounce ô Emperor lib. 17. the faith and duty vvherwith vve are bound vnto thee This did German Protestants 2. In Swiserland Zwinglius teacheth vs. Svviserland Zvvingl to 1. art 42. That vvhen the King shal deale perfidiously and beside the rule of Christ he may in Gods name be deposed Againe VVhiles naughty Kings are not deposed the vvhole people is punished of God And as for the Protestants of Sweueland their opinion SvveuelaÌ„d is manifest by their excluding the Catholique King of PolaÌ„d from succeding his Mercur. Gallobelg An. 1603. Holland late father And the Holandish Protestants wholy or cheefly defend their long rebellion against their Prince by coolor of religion France Caluin in epist ante lib. institut 3. In France Caluin their Arch-maister teacheth that who reigneth not to serue Gods glory ruleth not but playeth the theefe And in an other place Earthly Princes depose them In cap. 6. Daniel selues whyls they rise against God yea are vnworthy to be accounted men And his scholer Beza accounteth them Martyrs who dyed Beza in Praefat Bibl. 1564. Pantaleon Responsum trium ordinum BurguÌ„diae 1563. Michael Fabritius ep de Beza fal 62. Goodly Canons of Ministers Protestants svvorne to rebel depose Princes in batel against their King for religion and at Cabilon in France 20. Ministers in a Synod decreed to distroy the Church Nobility Magistrats And againe at Berna 1572. set forth Canons of this matter and decreed Can. 3. That in euery City al swore that they their posterity shal obserue firme and inuiolated the points following Can. 40. Vntil it shal please God in whose hands are the harts of Kings to change the hart of the French tyrant and restore the state of the Kingdome to better order raise vp some neighbor Prince whom we may know by his vertue notable marks to be the deliuerer of this miserable people in the meane tyme euery Citty shal choose a maior to gouerne them as wel in warre as peace Can. 40. Let al the Captains leaders haue this axiome as an vndoubted and most certain Oracle neuer to trust to them the King and his who so often and so notoriously haue broken their promise the publike peace and quietnes Nor euer let them lay downe weapons as long as they shal see them persecute the doctrin of saluation and the disciples of the same Item But if the euil be incurable if Gods wil be to roote them natural Princes out then if it please God to raise some Christian Prince to take reuenge of their sinnes and deliuer his people let them subiect them selues to that Prince as to an other Cyrus sent to them from God In the meane space let them gouerne them selues by these rules which we haue prescribed vnto them as laws Behould the verdit of French ministers assembled in Councel O if such rules had bene made in Seminaries what traitors and rebels had the authors bene What exclamations would Bel and his fellow ministers haue made against them 4. In Scotland Knox vttereth his and Scotland his fellow ministers mind herein in his appellation to the nobility people of Scotland Knox. p 36. That I may say bouldly the nobility gouerners iudges and people of England ought not Protestants bond to kil Princes by Knox. only to resist and withstand Mary Iezabel whom they cal their Queene but also put to death her her Priests and al others that ayded her as soone as openly they began to suppresse Christs Gospel And he setteth
conuinceth that we can doe it without deadly breaking it As for our confession we doe not confesse that our daylie offences are most great faults but daily confesse our most great fault whether it were done then or before Besides that humble and penitent mindes accompt themselues greatest sinners and their offences greatest faults So S. Paul 1. Timoth 1. v. 15. accounted S. Paul himselfe the chiefest sinner Yea good souls as S. Gregory saith acknowledge sinne where S. Gregor epist ad August Cant. cap. 10. Iob cap. 9. S. Gregor in Psalm 4. Paenitent none is and with Iob feare al their works And as the same holy Doctour noteth the reprobate accompt great sinns litle and the elect litle sinns grear and which before they thought were light straight they abhor as heauy and deadly And S. Hierom S. Hieron epist ad â—â—lant obserueth that it increaseth warines to take heed of litle sinnes as if they were great For with so much the more facility we abstaine from any sinne by how much more we feare it 6. And hence Bel may see why we in dayly confessions confesse our most great fault which I would God he would imitate and both confesse and amend his heynous fault of sinning against the holy Ghost and impugning the Catholique Church which he knoweth to be Gods Church Otherwise let him assure himselfe that shame wil be his end in this life and endles punishment his reward in the next Wel he may beat against this rocke but like the waues he shal without hurting it beat himselfe in pieces and be resolued into froth and foame Let him write books let him spend himselfe and make nets with the Spider of his owne guts they wil proue only spider webbes apt to cath or holde none but such as like inconstant and fleshly flyes are carrayed about with euery mynde of new doctrine and following their carnal appetites and licentiousnes seaze vpon fleshly baite And so Bel though he could become an other God Bel he should but be Beel zebub the God of flies Be myndful therfore Bel from whence thou art fallen and do penance Apocalip 2. FINIS Al praise to Almightie God A TABLE Of the things coÌ„teined in this booke vvherin a signifyeth article c. chapter and parag paragraph ADDITION of one tradition as much forbidden as of many ar 7. c. 2. parag 1. Addition to Scripture which forbidden which not ar 7. c. 2. pareg Anomia how it may signify transgression of the law ar 6. c. 2. parag 2. Antichrists true hinderance meant by S. Paul ar 1. c. 9. parag 4. Antichrists hinderance not taken away in Pipius tyme a. 1. c. 9. parag 3. Angles falsly charged by Bel art 5. c. 5. parag 6. S. Antonin falsly charged by Bel art 3. c. 1. parag 1. and 13. Apostataes may teach true doctrine art 7. c. 10 parag 9. Apostles Creed conserued by Tradition art 7. c. 9. parag 4. S. Athanasius explicated and his reuerence of Traditions art 7. c. 4. parag 9. S. Austin as a Christian said he wold not beleeue the Ghospel without the Church art 7. c. 9. parag 22. Sainct Austin wold not beleeue Maniche though he had had expresse Scripture ar 7. c. 9. parag 24. S. Austin how he compared Concupiscence with blindnes of hart art 4. c. 3. parag 1. S. Austins opinion of habitual Concupiscence art 4. c. 1. parag 18. S. Austins opinioÌ„ of inuoluntary motions art 4. c. 1. parag 13. S. Austin preuented Bels obiections art 4. c. 1. parag 18. S. Austin how he meant that we loue not God altogether art 8. c. 4. parag 2. S. Austin how he called our keeping the commaundements defectuous art 8. c. 1. parag 9. S. Austins teuerence and rule to know Traditions art 7. c. 4. parag 3. S. Austin said the Apostles eat bread our lord art 2. c. 5. parag 8. S. Austin said Iudas eat our price art 2. c. 5. paragr 8. S. Austin why he said Iudas eat bread of our lord art 2. c. 5. parag 8. S. Austin wold not credit the Scripture if the Catholiques were discredited art 7. c. 9. parag 22. S. Austin and S. Prosper Papists out of Bel. art 2. c. 4. parag 13. B. S. Basil explicated and his reuerence of Traditions art 7. c. 4. parag 13. S. Bede a Papist art 4. c. 4. parag 4. Bellarmins doctrin of merit the common doctrin of Catholiques a. 5. c. 6 parag 9. Beleefe in al points not prescribed at once art 7. c. 2. parag 7. Bel a right Apostata from Preisthood art 1. c. 9. parag 31. Bel against Caluin art 5. c. 2. parag 3. Bel admitteth Tradition a. 7. c. 9. parag 811. Bels answer about Tradition of the bible refuted art 7. c. 9. parag 5. Bel admitteth venial sinns art 6. c. 1. parag 1. Bels beleefe of venial sinne beside Gods booke art 6. c. 1. parag 2. Bel a Papist by his owne iudgement art 4. c. 1. parag 10. Bel against al Gods Church which liued in the first 200. years art 7. c. 10. parag 2. Bel alleadgeth authority against him selfe a. 7. c. 10. parag 5. Bel answereth not to the purpose art 7. c. 9. parag 7. Bels argument returned vpon him self art 2. c 6. parag 3. Bels blasphemy against God art 8. c. 2. parag 1. against his Church a. 7. c. 9. par 5. against iustification a. 4. c. 2. parag 1. Bels blasphemy accursed by S. Hierom art 8. c. 2. parag 1. Bels blindnes discouered art 1. c. 9. parag 6. Bel bound to recant art 3. c. 1. parag 13 a. 2. c 5. parag 9. Bels buckler the Princes sword art 1. c 1. parag 10. Bels challeng is Bellarmins obiections art 4. c. 3 parag 2. Bels complaint against Catholiques art 5. c 1 parag 1 Bel condemneth as blasphemy in the Pope which he iudgeth treason to deny to Princes art 1. c. 9. parag 23 Bels contradictions arâ— 1. c. 5. parag 4. c. 8. parag 5 a. 2. c 2. parag 4. a. 4 c 1. parag 12. 13. c. 2. parag 6. art 5. c. 3 parag 3. c. 5. parag 7. art 7. c. 7 parag 19 art 8. c. 1. parag 5 7. c. 2. par 4. Bâ—l câ—rrupted Scripture art 7. c. 2. parag 8 c. 7. parag 3. 12. corrupteth S. Ambros art 7 c. 4. parag 1â— Bel cursed of S. Paul by his owne iudgement art 7. c. 9 parag 8. Bel discredited him selfe art 1. chap. 9. parag 10. Bels dissimulation art 1. c. 1. parag 1. a 2. c 1. par 5 art 3. c. 1 parag 2. Bâ—l denyeth deuine faith to proceed from mans teaching art 7. c. 9 parag 20. Bel disproueth him self art 5. c. 6. parag 6. art 4. c. 1. parag 17. Bel exceedeth Pelagius art 7. c. 7. parag 1. Bels faith grownded vpon reason art 2. c. 1. parag 7. Bel slenderly grownded in faith art 2. c. 5. parag 6. Bels false translation art 2. c. 3. parag 8. c. 4. parag 13 a. 4 c. 2. parag 4. 7. 10. c. 5.
father Luther imitaâ—ing Luther lib. de vit coniugali 1522. See S. Iren. lib. 1. c. 1. Raro haereticus diligit castitatem Hieron in c. 7. Oseae pag. 38. the beastly Valentinians writeth that it is as necessary to haue a wife as to eat drinke or sleepe and how wel ministers practice this doctrin let al England be iudge 8. His third reply is that Papists thinck matrimony contracted to be a Sacrament ergo saith he perfect before copulatioÌ„ indispensable by man For as Canus saith The holy Ghost and grace of Canus lib. 8. de locis c. 5. Sacrament is not giuen by copulation Answer graunting the Antecedent I deny the consequence For though it haue the essence yet hath it not the perfection of the Sacrament before copulation Because before it signifyeth only the spiritual coniunction of Christ with a soule by grace as S. Thomas S. Thom. 4. d. 27. q. 1. art 3. q. 1. Innocent 3. c. delictum de digamis and Innoc. 3. teach which as it may by man be dissolued so also may matrimony before consummation but after it signifieth also the coniunction of Christ to the Church by flesh which as man can not dissolue so nether can he dissolue matrimony after consummation And as a seal is the parfection of a bargain making it more hard to be broken then otherwise it shold be so copulation is as it were the seal of the couenant of wedlock made betwixt man woman maketh it more indissoluble then otherwise it should be 9. As for Canus he meaneth of sinful copulation betwixt persons only affianced when they saith he after spousals company together But as for coniugal copulation after matrimony is contracted if it be done in that manner and for that end it should be it giueth grace and is meritorius as appeareth by S. Austin l. de bon coniug c. 21. 22. See S. Austin l. 1. de nupt concup c. 12. 13. 14. 15. tom 7. tom 6. where though he prefer the chastity of single life before the chastity of mariage yet he compareth Abrahams merit in his holy vsage of mariage with S. Ihons merit in liuing single Besides lawful copulation is a good worke as I hope Bel wil not deny but according to his owne doctrin art 5. Artic. 5. p. 61. euery good worke is meritorius or impetratorius of Gods fauor reward His fourh reply vz that matrimony should not be fully perfected in the Church if copulation do perfect it containeth no new difficulty 10. Fiftly he argueth it to be absurd That matrimony beginneth to be a Sacramant by pag. 39. copulation and was not by the Priests action 44 vntruth But more absurd it is to vtter vntruths For Catholiques say not that it beginneth to be See Bellar. l. 2. de Monachis c. 38. The contrary is a particuler opinion of Canus l. 8. de loc c. 5. Conc. Trid. sess 24. c. 1. de Reform pag. 39. a Sacrament by copulatioÌ„ or by the Priests action but that it beginneth by the mutual consent of the parties and is perfected by their copulation though that it be lawfully contracted the Priests ptesence be required His sixt obiection is that Matrimony was perfect in Paradise betwixt Adam and Eue. But this is to assume that which he was to proue His seuenth reply is If contracted matrimony were not de iure diuino both parties agreeing they might dissolue it them selues as they can dissolue spousals because as the lavv saith euery one may yeeld vp his right Answer Contracted matrimony is a Sacrament instituted by God and therfore can not be dissolued but by such as succeeding the Apostles are dispensers of Gods misteries 1. Corinth 4. S. Paul v. 1. The like reason is not of spousals nor of any other contract instituted by man 11. Eighthly he replyeth That mariage betwene the B. virgin and Ioseph was perfect where doubtles wanted copulation That it was perfect he proueth because the Math. 1. angel called her Iosephs wife And S. Ambrose saith That not deflowring of virginity S. Ambros de institut virg ca. 6. tom 1. S. August l. 2. de consens Euang. c. 1. tom 4. Lib. 1. de nupt concup c. 11. to 7. but coniugal couenant maketh wedlock And S. Austin writeth That we rightly vnderstand Ioseph to be maries husband by very copulation of wedlock without commixtion of flesh Againe God forbid that the bond of wedloock rumpatur be broken betwixt them who are content vpon mutual consent to abstein for euer from vse of carnal concupiscence For it was not falsly said of the Angel vnto Ioseph Fear not to take thy wife mary Answer Al these proofs conuince no more then that contracted matrimony is true mariage as we willingly confesse was betwixt Ioseph and our B. Lady For the Angel calleth her not Iosephs perfect wife but absolutly his wife Wherupon S. Hierom l. S. Hierom. pr. fin cont Heluid saith S. Ioseph was rather a keeper then a husband and in c. 1. Math. When thou hearest an husband do not suspect mariage but remember the custome of Scripture that spouses are called husbands and spousesses wises And S. Basil hom de human Chris gener calleth S. Basil that dispousation wherwith S. Ioseph and our Lady were maried beginning of Mariage As for S. Ambrose he denyeth not that deflowring perfecteth mariage but that it maketh it And S. Austin in the first place affirmeth that we truly vnderstand Ioseph to be Maries husband without copulation but addeth not that he is so perfectly 12. To the secoÌ„d place I answer that S. Austin speaketh there only of coÌ„summated mariage both because his intention in those Lib. 1. c. 1. books was as he professeth in the beginning to shew against the Pelagians That though childreÌ„ infected with original sinne do proceed from mariage it selfe is no sinne which difficulty hath no place but in coÌ„summated mariage As also because after he had proued in the forsaid 11. chapter that the bond of wedlock is not broken by purpose of absteining from vse as he speaketh of concupiscence or exercise of marigeable acts in the next chapter he concludeth thus VVherfore Cap. 22. then may not they remain man and vvife vvho of consent leaue of companying together if Ioseph and mary remayned man and vvife vvho not so much as began to company together By which Conclusion of his it is euident that before he had spoken only of consummated mariage and only meant to proue that it is not broken by priuate determination or purpose of the parties to absteine from exercise of copulation Which he proued by an argument a fortiori because vnconsummated matrimony of our B. Lady and Ioseph was not broken by their purpose of absteining from al carnal knowledge But whither vnconsummated matrimony which is not broken by such priuate purposes of the parties maried may vpon iust and vrgent cause be dissolued by
of Protestants touched in their late Conference of dissention amongst them gathered out of the conference at Hampton court as 1 whether baptisme by vvoemen be allowable pag. 8. 14. 15. 17. 18. 2. vvhether confirmation be lawful pag. 10. 3. vvhether baptisme be necessary pag. 16. 4. vvhether after receauing the holy Ghost we may totally depart from grace pag. 28. 5. vvhether the communion booke contradict the 15. article of their faith pag. 25. 6. vvhether there ought to be any Bishops pag. 36. 7. vvhether the intention of the Minister be essential to the Sacrament pag. 38. 8. vvhether a man once iustifyed remaine truly iust before God whatsoeuer sinne he commit pag. 41. and 14. 9. vvhether a iustifyed man falling into greeuous sinnes shal be saued without repentance for them 16. 10. vvhether the English Byble be truly translated pag. 45. 46. 11. vvhether the communion booke corrupt the Byble in two places pag. 63. 12. vvhether the Crosse be to be vsed in baptisme pag. 65. 13. VVhether the Church can institute an external significant signe pag. 67. 14. vvhether the Churches institution can bynde in conscience pag. 70. 15. VVhether the communion booke containe errors repugnant to Scripture pag. 59. 8. Moreouer more then a thousand Ministers In their Supplicatiō exhibited in April 1603. Ansvver to the Supplication whom the whole vniuersity of Oxford calleth their brethren and fellovv laborers in the Lords haruest in the supplication to his Maiestie exhibited in April 1603 professe That there is not in their Church an vniformity of doctrin This the Oxonians deny against their owne knowledge and the knowlege of al England For what vniformity is there where a thousand Ministers their fellow laborers professe them selues to disagree in points of religion from the rest yea his Maiestie witnesseth him selfe to haue receaued Conference p. 5. 22. many complaints through the dissentions in the Church and purposeth as he saith to setle an vniforme order through the vvhole Church and to plant vnity Wil now the Oxonians say there are no dissentions wil they make his Maiestie actum agere in setling vniformity and planting vnity where none wanteth And in like sort of the Scottish Church he testifyeth That there is such dissention euen in Conference p. 44. the Catachisme doctrin as vvhat vvas Catachisme dostrin in one congregation vvas scarsly accepted as sound and orthodox in an other And this dissention amongst Protestants about matters of religion is with such obstinacy as notwithstanding proclamations disputations conferences and decrees or Canons of their Church it remaineth stil amongst them and wil as long as heresy remayneth in them which teacheth them to expound Scriptures according to their priuate spirits and to recant nothing because as his Maiestie Conference p 102. saith of the Scottish Ministers it standeth not vvith their credits 9. The fourth note which Bel gathereth out of S. Thomas his words is more to the purpose vz. That motions of concupiscence preuenting reason are venial sinnes But if Bel had amongst his important obseruations obserued also that S. Thomas spake immediatly before of deliberate reason he might haue noted that he meant only of such motions as preuent perfect but not imperfect deliberation and therfore are as he saith imperfect or venial sinnes VVherfore be myndful Bel from vvhence thou art falne and do penance Apocalip 2. THE FIFT ARTICLE OF THE MERIT OF GOOD WORKES CHAP. I. Of the Protestants enmity to good vvorks and friendship vvith euil BEL beginneth this Article Bel pag. 60. with a greeuous complaint against Papists who saith he most vnchristianly slander the professors of Christs Ghospel as though they vvere enemies to good vvorks of vvhich they thinke speak teach and vvrite more christianly and more religiously then Papists do Both these points he proueth no otherwise then with an I say I say saith he that good vvorks though they can not go before yet do euer follovv iustification are necessary to saluation and true effects of predestination As if Bel were al the new Ghospellers or they al agreed with him concerning good works We alleadge their words produce their deeds shew the fruits and effects of their enmity to good works and Bel thinketh to answer al this with an I say Surely he presumeth of beneuolous and partial iudges or he wold neuer answer thus He with an I say may slāder Popes Princes Papists whatsoeuer and an I say yea manifest proofe to the contrary wil not suffice him Such force his I sayes haue Dixit facta sunt But Syr I both say wil proue by words and deeds that both you and your Ghospellers are not only enemies to good works but great frends to euil works And as for enmity to good works 2. First they bid vs beware of good works Let vs bevvare saith Luther of sinne Luther sermon de nouo testamēto seu de Missa Colloquiū Attenburg but much more of lawes and good works And some of his schollers in the conference of Altenburg teach vs to pray that we perseuer vnto the end in faith vvithout good vvorks 2. they teach good works to be harmful Good vvorks said the forsaid Lutherans are pernitious to saluation Againe Christians vvith good vvorks belong to Sathan And as Surius Surius comment Ann. 1564. Staphil in Apolog. Staphilus and others report a Minister was not allowed in Saxony because he beleeued not this 3. because they say al good works are sinne and vnciean so Luther art 23. Caluin 3. instit c. 14. parag 9. 11. c. 15. parag 3. and 4. whitaker contr Durae l. 1. p. 49. Bucley answer to 8. reasons p. 111. and 109. Perkins tit of merit and Bel art 4. pag. 48. teacheth that sinne is alwaies annexed to Epicur◠vvold seeme to loue vertue though he made pleasure his end good works 4. They teach that good works of their nature deserue damnation There was neuer saith Caluin lib. 3. instit c. 14. parag 11. any work of a godly man which if it were examined by Gods seuere iudgment were not damnable How can Protestants Habentes speciem pietatis virtutem autem eius abnegantes 2. Timoth 4. v. 5. now be friēds to good workes which they bid beware of account hurtful sinne and damnable Surely their friendship can be no better then Ioabs was to Amasa when he kissed him but withal thrust his dagger into his body 2. Reg. 20. 3. And on the contrary side their friendship Frendship of Protestants to euil vvorks to euil works is manifest 1. because they teach that euil works make not an euil man nor any can damne a man but incredulity this Luther teacheth in plaine Luther tearms lib. de libert Christian and lib. de capt Babil c. de baptis 2. because they make God author of sinne Zuinglius saith Zvvinglius sermon de Prouidentia ad Principem Cattorum 1530. c. 5. Caluin in playne termes maketh God author of sinne
to 1. S. Paul and corrected this error so I would wish Bel to do His third place is 2. Timoth 3. v. 15. Holy scriptures are able to make thee vvise to saluation This maketh not against vs. both Hovv Scriptures are able to make men vvise to saluation because we deny not that Scripturs are able to make men wise to saluation but only deny that they alone do it As also because we graunt they actually conteine whatsoeuer is necessary to euery mans saluation and vertually whatsoeuer els And lastly because the forsaid words are meant only of the old Testament which S. Timothy saith S. Paul there Had learned from his infancy which alone being not as Protestants confesse absolutly sufficient so as we may reiect the new testament they can not therof inferre Scripture to be so absolutly sufficient as that we may reiect Traditions Now let vs come to his proofs out of Fathers which particulerly proceed against Traditions CHAP. IIII. Bels arguments out of Fathers touching sufficiency of Scripture and Traditions ansvvered VIncentius lyrin who lyued in S. Austins Vincent Lyrin con haereses tyme Writeth That he enquiring of many holy and learned men How he should escape heresy they al answered him by sticking to Scripture and the Churches Traditions And. S. S. Ireney lib. 3. c. â— Ireney writeth of him selfe that by traditions of the Church of Rome he confounded al those that teach otherwise then they should No maruel therfore if Bel being desyrous noâ— to escape but to spread heresy and loth to be Ould heretiks detest traditions S. Iren. Tortullian S. Hilarie S. Augustin c. 1. to 6. S. Epiphan confownded do with the olde hereticks Marcionits and Valentinians ex Iren l. 3. c. 2. and Tertul. de praescrip with the Ari ans ex Hilario l. cont Constant August l. 1. contr Maximin with the Aerians ex Epipha her 75. with the Ennomians ex Basil l. de spir sanct c. 27. 29. with the S. Basil Nestorians and Eutichians ex 7. Synod 7. Synod act 1. impugne Traditions And let not the Reader maruel that Bel bringeth the words of dyuers Fathers against Traditions which almost al are obiections taken out of Bellarmin Bollarm lib. 4. de verbo Dei c. 11. For they make no more for his purpose then the words of Scripture did for the Diuel or Iewes when they alleadged them Math. 4. v. 6. Ioan. 12. v. 34. against Christ And we Wil bring such expresse words of the same Fathers for Traditions as shal cleare al suspition and can admit no solution 2. First he cyteth Dionis Areopag saiing Bel pag. 94. S. Dionys de diu nom c. 1. vve must nether speake nor thinke any thing of the Deity praeter ea beside those things vvhich Scriptures haue reuealed I might except that Protestants deny Dionis Areopag to be Centur. CeÌ„t. 1. lib. 1. c. 10. Luther Caluin ex Bellarm. l. 2. de Monachis c. 5. author of those bookes but I neede not For the words make nothing to the purpose both because they forbid only speaking or thincking of the Deity beside that which Scripture reuealeth as also because by praeter he vnderstaÌ„deth not euery thing out of Scripture els we should not vse the words Trinity and Consubstantiality but only such as are quite beside and neither actually nor vertually are conteined in Scripture But let S. Dionis tel plainly his owne minde concerning Traditions Those first Captaines saith he and Princes of our Hierarchy haue S. Dionys l. de ecclesiastic Hierarch c. 1. deliuered vnto vs diuyne and immaterial matters partly by written partly by their vnvvritten institutions How could Apostolical Traditions be more plainly auouched 3. Two places Bel bringeth out of S. Austin S. Augustin 2. de doct Christian c. 6. 2. de peccat mer. remiss â— vlt. which because we alleadged them in cap. 1. conclus 2. and proue no more then is there taught I omit And as for S. Austin he not only auoucheth Apostolical Traditions epist 118. but de Genes ad litt l. 10. c. 23. tom 3. professeth that baptisme of infants were not to be beleeued if it were not an Apostolical tradition and obiecteth them against the Pelagians in lib. cont Iulian. amoni and giueth vs this rule to knowe them If S. Austins rule to knovv Apostolical traditions S. Ireney lib. 3. c. 1. the whole Church obserue them and no Councel appoynted them l. 2. de bapt c. 7. 6. 23 24 S. Ireney he cyteth because he writeth That the Ghospel which the Apostles preached they aftervvard deliuered vnto vs in Scriptures and it is the foundation of our faith These words proue no more then that the Apostles preached not one Ghospel writ an other but one and the selfe same But that euery one of them or any one of them writ euery whit they al preached S. Ireney affirmeth not And his affection to Traditions is euident both out of his words before rehearsed as also lib. 3. c. 4. where he saith we ought to S. Ireney keepe Traditions though the Apostles had written nothing And affirmeth many barbarous nations of his tyme to haue beleeued in Christ keapt the doctrine of saluation and antient Tradition without Scripture 4. The next he produceth is Tertullian â—el pag. 95. Tertul. con Hermogen writing thus I reuerence the fulnes of Scripture which sheweth to me the Maker and the things made And soone after But whither al things were made of subiacent matter I haue no where readde let Hermogenes shoppe shew it written If it be not written let him feare that wee prouided for them that adde or take away Answer Tertullian speaketh of one perticuler matter which the hereticke Hermogenes of his owne head not only without Tradition or Scripture both contrary to both taught of creating the worlde of subiacent matter not of nothing And no maruel if Tertullian said the Scripture was ful in this poynt and required Scripture of Hermogenes for proofe of his heresy being sure he could alleadge no Tradition But for true Traditions Tertullian is so great a manteiner of them as lib. de prescrip he thincketh hereticks ought to be confuted rather by them then by Scripture and other where affirmeth Tertull. lib. de Corona milit lib. 1. cont Marcionem l. 2. ad vxorem diuers things to be practised in the Church as the ceremonies in baptisme signe of the Crosse and such like only by authority of Tradition without al proofe of Scripture vvhere of saith he Tradition is the beginner custome conseruer and faith the obseruer 5. Of S. Cyprian Bel much triumpheth Bel pag. 96. because writing against one particuler Tradition Primo imitare pietatem humilitatemque Cipriani tunc profes consilium Cipriani August lib. 2. cont Crescon cap. 31. to 7. S. Cyptian epist ad Pom peium of not rebaptizing the baptized by hereticks which he thought had
v. 10. Nay al are interpreters if the Scripture be cleare to al. 4. Origen saith that Scripture is reuera multis Fathers Origen lib. 7. cont Celsum in locis obscura in very deed obscure in many places And that they take away the key of science who say the Scripture is manifest hom 20. in Math. S Chrysostom noteth S. Chrysost hom 40. in Ioannem â—om 3. That Christ bid not read but search Scriptures because summa indigent diligentia they need great study S. Hierom writeth that al the epistle S. Hierom. epist ad Algosiam q. 8. Epistol ad Paulin. S. Augustin l. 2. de doct Christ c. 6. See 12. Conf. c. 14. serm 4. 5. 13. de verb. Apost Iren. lib. 2. cap. 47. Cyrill praefat lib. thesaur S. Augustin tom 2. to the Romans is nimys obscuritatibus inuoluta wrapped in excessiue obscurities That the Apocalips hath as many misteries as words S. Austin noteth That to tame our pride some things are so obscurely said as densissimam caliginem obducunt they bring ouer a most thick darknes And wil Bel account that cleare which the glistering beam of Gods Church for so Bel tearmeth S. Austin accounted so dark and obscure And epist 119. c. 21. professeth to be ignorant of many more things in Scripture then he knoweth If Bel after our holy Fathers please to heare his owne vnholy syers Luther telleth him Luther praefat in psal that he is most impudently rash who professeth to know one book of Scripture in al points By daily reading of Scripture saith Caluin 3. instit Caluin Quotidie legendo in multos obscuros locos incidimus qui nos ignorantiae coarguunt Bel p. 102. Reason c. 2. parag 4. we fal vpon many obscure places which conuince vs of ignorance Nay to what purpose doth Bel require the commentaries of Fathers for better vnderstanding of Scriptures if there be no difficulty in them 5. Finally if our coÌ„mon lawes handling nothing but buying selling bargaining and such common and vsual matters as are daily practized of men be so hard and difficult as they require great study to be wel vnderstood and Clients wil giue great fees for Lawyers counsel in them what shal we thinke of Gods laws which entreat of deuine and supernatural things far aboue mans reach and capacity Or if as S. Austin S. Augustin tom 6. saith lib. de vtil cred c. 7. He that hath no skil in poetry dare not medle with Terentian Maurus without a maister Asper Cornutus Donatus and infinit others are requisit to vnderstand any Poet and doest thou without a guide rush vpon holy books ful of deuine matters O exceeding boldnes or rather madnes And againe If euery Iâ— cap. vlt. art though base and easy require a teacher or maister to get it vvhat is more foolish heady pride then not to learne the booke of deuine sacraments of their interpreters Now let vs heare Bels reasons to the contrary 6. Salomon saith he Prouerb 8. v. 8. 9. teacheth Bels Arguments p. 108. That the words of wisdom are easy and open to euery one of vnderstanding But let vs heare Salomon him self Al my speeches are iust there is not in them any thing wicked or peruerse They are right to such as vnderstand and euen to such as find knowledge What word is here of easynes or manifestnes of Gods words but only of their vprightnes and equity And let Bel learne of S. Austin in psal 146. to 8. S. Austin That in Scripture there is nothing peruers but some thing obscure But perhaps Bels english Byble deceaued him which to deceaue the Reader vsed the ambiguity of the english Bible printed 1584. word plaine which may signify ether manifest or euen for the latin word aequi 7. After this Bel cyteth dyuers places of pag. 108. Psal 25. v. 9. Ioan. 7. v. 17. Ioan. 8. v. 31. 32. Math. 11. v. 25. S Paul Scripture to proue That God reuealeth his wil to al that fear him to litle ones That the doers of his wil know his doctrin and truth But seeing it is no where said That God reuealeth his wil or the good know it by bare reading his word but rather the contrary because faith commeth of hearing and how shal they heare without a preacher Rom. 10. v. 17. 15. These places make nothing for easines of Scripture Besids that they may be expownded not of Gods wil in al points but in such as are necessary to euery mans saluation which we graunt to be plainly reuealed in Scripture I omit his other places That the Scripture Psalm 119. al. 118. v. 105. 2. Pet. 1. v. 19. 1. Cor. 2. v. 15. Cap. 9. parag 17. Bel p. 108. is a lanthern light or candle and That the spiritual man iudgeth or as he expowndeth vnderstandeth al things for they be answered hereafter 8. He alleageth S. Chrisostom saying what need we a preacher our negligence hath brought this necessity For to what end is a sermon needful Al things are clear and plaine out of Scripturs what things soeuer are necessary are manifest But S. Chrisostom speaketh not of al S. Chrysost hom 3. in 2. Thessalon things in Scripture but only of such as are necessary to euery ones saluation as is euident by his last words And such need no preacher for to be vnderstood though they need to be beleeued as S. Paule testifyeth S. Paul Roman 10. 17. But besides these there are things obscure as the same holy Doctor witnesseth in the same place in these words Thou knowest which are cleare what askest thou the obscure And hom 10. in Ioan. he biddeth S. Chrysost item Concion 3. de Lazaro men note vvich is cleare which obscure in Scripture and to harken the exposition of them in the Church And for such points preachers and preaching is as necessary now to vs as wel for vnderstanding as for beleeuing them as they were to the Eunuch act 8. to the two disciples Luc. 24. Other places he Homil. 9. Coloss and Concion 3. de Lazaro cyteth out of S. Chrysostome concerning reading of Scripture which shal be answered in his proper place 9. What hath bene answered to the words of S. Chrysostom is to be applyed to the like in S. Austin lib. 2. de doct Christ S. Augustin tom c. 9. In these things vvhich are plainly set dovvn in Scripture are found al those things vvhich concerne faith and manners For he saith not absolutly Al things but al those things therby insinuating that he meaneth only of things necessary to be beleeued and done of euery one which Bel perceauing in englishing False translat his words leaft out the word Those But I maruel what he meant to cite S. Aust S. Augustin l. 2. de doct Christ c. 6. writing The holy Ghost hath so tempered Scriptures that locis apertioribus by manifester places Bel translateth manifold places he might prouide for hunger
home in our houses Grosse absuraity of Bel. and not heare them read in the Churches which note is more absurd then I need refel yet let the Reader remember it But S. Austins speech was not to al kind of men nor at al tymes but to his owne people whome he knew were like to encrease their deuotion in the holy tyme of lent whereof he spake by reading Scripture And the like exhortation may any Catholique Bishop make to his flocke whome he knoweth not to haue itching ears and 2. Timoth. 4. v. 4. not to be soone conuerted to fables yet withal condemne the promiscual licence graunted by Bel to al sorts of people of what sexe state calling or condition soeuer For so the vnlearned and vnstable be licenced yea necessarily ought saith Bel to read Scripture pag. 103. S. Pet. 2. c. 3. v. 16. though as S Peter testifyeth they wil depraue it to their owne perdition 17. And such constant Catholiques were those men and woemen which as S. Hierom S. Hierom. in psalm 133. Epistol ad Gaudent epist ad Celantiam writeth did striue vvho should learne most Scriptures and vvhome he exhorted to learne the Scripture vvithout booke and to haue it alvvaies in their hands and to teach it their children For as him selfe writeth epist ad Gaudent cit vvhat vve speake vve speake not in general but in part nor say of al but of some And epist ad Paulin. reprehendeth greatly That euery one should take Scripture in hand Wherfore if Bel apply S. Hieroms words to al sorts of persons of what condition Bel like a foolish Phisition soeuer he doth not only against the holy Doctors meaning but sheweth him selfe to be a foolish Phisition prescribing the like diet to al kinde of persons not knowing who can eat milk but not solid meat as the Apostle speaketh 1. Corinth 3. v. 2. Hebr. 5. v. 12. For some as he saith Hebr. 5. v. 11. are weake to heare some part of Gods word and much weaker wold be to read it al. Wherfore the Catholique Church like a prudent nurse permitteth such children as she seeth strong and able to read Scripturs to feed them selfs and cut their owne meat but to such as she perceaueth to be weake and not so able she wil not graunt the like liberty but cheweth their meat or cutteth it her selfe by preaching expouÌ„ding Scriptures to them lest if they were their owne caruers they should hurt them selfs And Protestants like careles nurses let al alike carue them selfs and therby cut their owne fingers yea throats kil them selfs by taking oftentymes poison insteed of meat 18. And hereupon I must aduettise the Bel p. 112. Reader of two vntruths which Bel fathereth vpon Catholiques vz. That they deeme vntruth 85 vntruth 86 them most holy who can by hart no Scripture at al but absteine from reading therof as from poison of their souls For ignorance of Scripture in Ignorance of it self no holynes it selfe we account no holynesse at al and much lesse deeme them most holy who know lest of Scripture But great holines we esteeme it to chuse rather harmles ignorance then curious and disobedient skil As great holines it had bene in Eue 10 Donum ipsum vtiliter aliquando ignoratur S. Augustin l. 6. cont Iul. c. 16. haue made choise rather of ignorance of good and euil then of knowledge therof And the like ignorance of Scripture in Catholiques we preferre before Protestants knowledge For to be thus ignorant saith Tertullian is better lest we know that we should Tertull. l. de praescript not Faith saith he shal saue vs not exercise in Scripture Faith is commanded exercise in Scripture consisting in curiosity hath glory only in study of knowledge Let curiosity giue place to faith let glory yeeld to saluation Thus Tertullian a most antient writer whose counsel I wold to God Protestants did follow And as for Scripture we account it no poison but the food of life and the reading therof good and holsome if it be done as it should not vpon curiosity and disobedience to the Churches precept as the Aple was good in it selfe and the eating therof had not bene hurtful if it had not bene against Gods commandement 19. Bel cireth also Theodoret writing Bel p. 113. That the Hebrevv books are turned into al languages Theodoret. lib. 5. de Graecan affection Againe That we may find ditchers and neatheards and planters reasoning of the Trinity and creation of al things Answer That of the Scripturs translation shal be answered in the next chapter The other proueth no more then that simple people knew the said misteries whereof he saith not they read but reasoned And S. Gregory Nazianzen S. Greg. Nazianz orat 1. de Theol. greatly discommendeth such for it And by the like reason might Bel proue euery Catholique to read Scripture Because as Bellarmin Bellarm. lib. 2. de verbo Dei c. 4. saith truly Catholique rusticks and woemen though they vnderstand not the sentences of Scripture yet they vnderstand the misteries of our redemption and can reason of them yea better then many Protestants who dayly read Scripture But saith Bel why are not al permitted Bel p. 115. to read Scripture if al can vnderstand therein the misteries of our redemption And like to one that hath no thing to doe proueth a needles matter that the knowledge of the misteries of our redemption is necessary and sufficient to saluation though in the next page before he noted that al things Contradict 18. conteined in the written worde which no 18. doubt are more then the misteries of our redemption â—re necessary for al people But omitting Bels contradiction To his argument out of Bellarmin I answer that Bellarmin affirmeth not as Bel imposeth vntruth 87 That al can vnderstand the misteries in the Scripture but rather the contrary when he saith That many vnderstand not the sentences of Scripture And though al could vnderstand the misteries in Scriptures yet al were not to be permitted to read them because al haue not as S. Paul writeth their senses exercised Hebr. 5. v. 14. 1. Cor. 2. v. 5. 1. Cor. 3. v. 1. Rom. 12. v. 3. 1. Cor. 3. v. 2. Hebr. 5. v. 12. to the discerning of good and euil al are not perfect to haue wisdome spoken amongst them al are not to be instructed as spiritual but some as carnal Al wil not be wise to sobriety but some more wise then behooueth them Rom. 12. v. 3. Finally al are not capable of solid meat but some of mikle only CHAP. VIII Of the translation of Scripture into vulgar tongues IT is not expedient to haue or vse commonly Scripture not to be vsed commonly in vulgar tongues Scriptures in vulgar languages This is against Bel p. 106. but it followeth of that which hath bene proued in the former Chapter For if it be not expedient
absolutly for the vulgar sort to read Scripture it is not expedient that it be common in vulgar tongues lest some like foolish Eue be tempted by the sight thereof curiously and against command to read it Secondly because nether the Iewes after their language was corrupted by their captiuity translated the Scripture into their vulgar language Nor the Church euer commanded the Scriptures to be translated into euery vulgar tongue but generally vsed them in Hebrew greeke and latine in which tongs they were written As for the English Bybles translated by Protestants See Conference at Hampton Court pag. 45. 46. 47. they al hitherto haue bene naught as them selfs confesse and are now about a new translation which hereafter perhaps wil be found as faulty as the former Whereby we see that the English faith hitherto hath bene false as builded vpon the English Bible which was false and consequently The good vvhich Protestants haue gotten by English Bibles who dyed in it dyed in a false faith and relyed vpon mans worde in steed of Gods And this is the true death which common people haue incurred and al the good they haue reaped by reading Scriptures in English according to the serpentine counsel of Ministers For where before they knew so much of Gods worde as was sufficient to saluation by reading English Bibles they haue read a lying worde as now after 46. years experience they both see and confesse and because they would not content them selfs with knowledge sufficient to sobriety and saluation but as the Apostle S. Paul writeth Rom. 12. v. 3. be more wise then behooued them God hath sent them as the same Apostle saith 2. Thess 2. v. 11. the operation of error to beleeue lying 2. Against this Bel obiecteth That the Bel p. 106. Apostle calleth them madde who read the Ghospel 1. Cor. 14. v. 24. to people in a language vnknovvne to them and the people also that listen therto as Catholiques doe Answer The Apostle is so far from condemning seruice of God in a tongue vnknowne to the hearers as he saith to such a one Thou doest vvel 1. Corinth 14. v. 17. But indeed he saith That if Ideots and infidels hard vs so doing they wold say we were madde If al the Church meet together saith he Only Idiots and infidels condēne seruice in an vnknovvne tonge and al speake vvith tongues and Ideots or infidels enter vvil they not say that you are madde 1. Corinth 14. v. 23. Wherfore not S. Paul but onely Ideots or infidels cōdemne the Churches seruice in an vnknowne tongue 3. And if the sacrifice and prayer of Zachary Luc. 1. v. 10. 11. which the people did not so much as heare or see did greatly profit them why may not the sacrifice and prayers of Priests which the people both see and heare greatly profit them though they vnderstand them not And if Bel wil excuse Zachary and the Iewes yea God who commanded it Leuit. 16. from madnes though they stood without dores and could nether heare nor see and much les vnderstand the sacrifice and prayers Much better if he please may he excuse Catholiques who both see and heare and parrly vnderstand the Catholique seruice And though Bel scoffe at Catholiques listening to the Ghospel tedde in latine Yet Origen Origen hom 20. in Iosue writeth That with only hearing Scripture though we doe not vnderstand The Diuels vvords not vnderstood vvorke euil Ergo Gods vvords not vnderstood do good it the poison of naughty spirits which besiege vs is driuen away as it were with a prayer and holy spirits are inuited to helpe vs. For saith he If words of coniuration pronounced though not vnderstood worke inchantments how much more vertue thinke we haue the words of holy Scripture And if S. Chrysostom hom 3. de Lazar S. Chrysost might say That though we vnderstand not Scripture yet ex ipsa lectione multa nascitur sanctimonia much holines riseth by very reading Why may we not say the like of very hearing And because Bel vrgeth this obiection no father I answer it no fuller who list see more of it let him read Rhemist 1. Corinth 14. D. Stapleton vpon the same place and Bellar. l. 2. de verb. Dei c. 16. 4. Bel obiecteth out of Theodoret That pag. 113. Theodoret. lib. 5. de Graecan affection the Hebrew books were translated into al languages This is nothing against vs who deny not but Scripture hath bene and may be vpon iust and vrgent causes translated into vulgar languages so it be not vulgarly vsed and common to al kinde of vulgar people Bel p. 106. vntruth 88 Vid. Indic libror. prohibit And here by the way I must aduertise the Reader of dyuers vntruths vttered by Bel concerning this matter 1. That the Pope burneth Scriptures in vulgar tongue This is not so For he burneth only heretical translations and al England knoweth how currant the Rhemists testament is amongst Catholiques 2. That the Pope excommunicateth al lay vntruth 89 vntruth 90 men that reason of matter of faith or dispute of his power citeth 6. decret lib. 5. cap. Quicunque Here be two vntruths For nether is there any worde of reasoning of the Popes power but only of disputing of the Catholique faith without touching whereof we may reason of the Popes power in diuers waies as is shewed art 1. cap. 1. Nether forbiddeth he lay men to reason or At vvhat tyme lay men are for bidden to dispute of faith dispute of faith with whom-soeuer or in what case soeuer but only with Heretiks as is euident out of the whole chapter which instructeth Catholiques how they ought to behaue them selfs towards Heretiks and when Cleargy men may dispute as when that Canon was made they might in al Christendome And in this case it is vnlawful for lay men to dispute of faith both because generally they are not sufficiently S. Greg. Nazianz orat 1. de Theol. in Apologet. orat Quod◠non liceat semper publice de Deo contédere learned to defend the faith against Heretiks as also because disputing of faith is proper them to whome preaching belongeth who are not lay but Cleargy men Whereupon said S. Gregory Nazianz. It is not euery ones part to dispute of God This is not so base matter or pertaining to them vvho as yet creeping on the ground are busyed with earthly study Euery one may thinke of God but not dispute of God Thus S. Gregory for his great knowledge surnamed the Deuine whose counsel I suppose euery wise man wil sooner follow then Babling Bel. And the ciuil Cod. de Sum. Trin. law punisheth al lay men that publikly dispute of faith 3. That Priests oftentymes vnderst and vntruth 91 not the latin vvords of absolution This he might better obiect to his fellow ministers See Bels lacke of latin art 5 c. 4. paragr 10. art 2. c. 4.