all peradventure as if he had read where an Image is there is no Religion without all peradventure the good man is deceived I say no more To what he next cites out of Origen we shall answer hereafter Now to the Doctors Chapters and Sections CHAP. I. Of the Doctors ungrounded discourse to the wrongful charge on Catholicks for making new Articles in Faith TOugh my task be chiefly to follow the Doctor in his Quotations and note as he goes along some few of his many Errors Yet touch I must a little on a discourse he is pleased to begin with Chapter the first It seems to enervate much our Christian Faith and weaken the Authority of the most Ancient Councils Page then the fourth and first Section he holds the two Testaments the words of Christ and of the Apostles the Fountains of Faith which none denies but next he adds Whatsoever caeme in after these foris est is to be cast out it belongs not unto Christ This latter assertion to say no more hath too much of the harshness in it for the difinitions of the Nicen Council and of the other three general Councils with St. Athanasius his Creed came in after the words of Christ and Holy Scripture are these Think ye like old Garments to be laid a side or cast out as not at all belonging to Christ belong they do most certainly as Rivers to their Fountains though not own'd as Original Springs and the first Foundations of our Faith Observe therefore I beseech you how the Doctor deals with us how he leads us on in darkness whilst he sets men a seeking after the Fountains of Faith but with it turns by the Stream cuts of the Torrent of Authority whereby to find them that is in a word he makes null all Authority that can assert with certainty Such were the Words of Christ such the Doctrine of the Apostles c. Judge whether I say not aright and demand of the Doctor upon whose certain proposal can he rely or indubitably admit of Christ's words as sacred If he answers Scripture the Question return's again and he is asked a new who it is that doth ascertain him of Scripture If the Fathers they are with him Fallible yes and full of ambiguous sences If the Church that saith he is changeable hath brought in novelties contrary to Ancient Faith if Councils not one is found but lyable to Error Turn by therefore these intermedial Streams running between us and the Fountains of Faith destroy the certainty of such Witnesses say that no man or society of men since Christ and his Apostles hath without a possibility of erring assured us that Christ spake that the Evangelists writ as they did the whole Scripture God knows will be cast aside also yes and become a comfortless an unwarranted Book Whence follow 's a total ruin of Christian Religion This is not my assertion but the great St. Austins the Quotation is known Tom. 6. contra epistolam Manichei cap. 5. Ego vero Evangelio non crederem c. I would not believe the Gospel unless the Authority of the Church moved me to believe it Our Doctor may think he salves this objection in his next ensuing lines pag. 4. where he saith To these that is to Scripture we add not as Authors but as helpers of our Faith and Heirs of the Doctrine Apostolical the sentiments and Catholick Doctrine of the Church in the Ages next after the Apostles not that we think c. I Answer Here is no man knows what confusedly shut up in two Ambiguous VVords Heirs and Helpers to get out of darkness I might first demand how knows the Doctor now exactly what the Sentiments or Catholick Doctrine of the Church Anciently were in the Ages next after the Apostles The Proposal of our present Church overgrown as he saith with a thousand Errors is an infufficient warranty Both Fathers and Councils were even then Fallible and had they been Infallible their writings since that may perhaps have fallen into ill hands and lost their purity But I wave this discourse and propose to our present purpose this Question only Are we Christians now being obliged under Damnation to believe those Sentiments of the Ancient Church as undoubted Helpers as certain apparent Heirs of Divine Truth or no if not They cast us wholly upon uncertainties and may as well help us on to Err as hit right if we are bound to own them as certain Heirs of Divine Truth Scripture must assure it for saith the Doctor To believe any thing Divine that is not Scripture is a divillish spirit and undoubtedly affirm that at least in the Ages next after Christ there was a society of men not lyable to Error that kept our Christian Faith entire without spot or blemish faithfully transmitted it to Posterity c. Now all I can desire of the Doctor is to produce that Scripture which purifies the Ancient Church only and makes the next ensuing Ages of that Church Spurious in Doctrine fearfully despicable and lyable to Error Thus much I am confident he shall never shew for our dearest Saviour that Established a Christian Church promised he would be with it to the end of the World Gods alseeing providence drives not on his work by halfs nor leaves his Church when the Doctors fancy listeth Souls are now as dear to Christ as they were in the Primitive Ages He shed his Sacred Blood for All if then he secured his Church from Error and directed Souls into Truth he doth the like favour now and will not permit his Immaculate Spouse to beguile them with falshood All therefore the Doctor saith here is a deceitful Paralogism yes and Paradoxes not to be tolerated A Paradox it is to talk of Heirs and Helpers of Apostolical Doctrine and rob them of their Infallibility A Paradox it is to say that these Heirs and Helpers sent Milions of Souls into the Bosom of Christ and cast more Milions in after Ages out of his Bosom for want of true Faith A Paradox it is that Christ only remained with his Church for a time and then left it destitute of Divine Assistance yes and in points most Fundamental But the greatest Paradox of all which amuses every one is That now towards an end of the World a new sort of unknown men the Doctor is one will become our Teachers and tell us exactly how long Christ was with his Church and when he leap'd out of it He was with it say they for some three or four hundred years and then left it fluctuating tossed and at last saw it without Mercy overturned with a deluge of Errors And credit this we must upon their bare word because they say it without Sctipture without Reason yes expresly contrary to both and all Ancient Authority The Doctor to prove the Church by Scripture only quotes St. Austin in his Margent pag. 4. de vnit ecclesiae cap. 3 4. 5. but both mangles his words and conceals the
force of his Argument Sunt certe saith the Saint libri Dominici quorum Authoritati utrique consentimus utrique credimus c. There are certain books of our Lord He means Scripture to whose Authority we both yeild we both believe Ibi Quaeramus ecclesiam Let us look for the Church there c. That is seeing we both who now dispute admit of Scripture and believe it let us upon such a supposition go forward and prove the Church by Scripture which is an excellent way of Arguing but if any question the Authority of Scripture it self take it we must when we make a right Analysis upon the Church's Authority solely and say with St. Austin I would not believe the Scripture but for the Church I omit the brags he hath pag. 6. of Protestants being more then indubitably Conquerors meer empty words and observe how he puts himself on a new trouble pag. 7th where he saith Whatsoever we cannot prove by Scripture we disclaim it I will not here tell the Doctor he must then disclaim every Tenet of Protestant Religion no more in Scripture then Arianism as it stands opposite to the Roman Faith But briefly I argue thus A Church secured from Error and which Infallibly proposeth Divine Truth can be proved by Scripture or cannot If the first there was is and shall ever be in the World a society of Christians un-crrable and certain in Doctrine that neither injures Faith nor by intromitting Novelties destroy Apostolical Doctrine for the Scripture as we now suppose saith so and what it saith is true One favour therefore I humbly beg of the Doctor that he would by a plain designation point me out this unerrable body of Christians and clearly also design me such known out cast Christians that are not of this Moral body my demand is reasonable and require's no long discourse nor any definition of a Church but to have this unerring company design'd and candidly If the Scripture Warrant 's not such an Infallible company of Christians the Doctor though he pretend to it can never believe with a true and infallible Act of Supernatural faith that the Ancient Church Inherited Catholick Doctrine that it sent Milions of Souls to Heaven That what we now read is the Apostles Creed that the Ancient Councils erred not in their Definitions No nor that there ever was or is now Pure and Incorrupt Scripture among Christians I say he cannot believe these truths with a certain assent of Supernatural Faith but at most with a meer opinative Judgment which may as well be wrong as right false as true staggering assuredly it is and not steddy if a meer Opinion yes and wholly destitute of that strength which God requires to Supernatural Faith In his 10th page he is fierce against the Church of Rome for pretending to a power not only of declaring New Articles of Faith but of making new Symbols and Creeds and imposing them as necessary to Salvation To this purpose he cites the Bull of Leo the tenth against Martin Luther whose twenty seventh Proposition is this and condemned Certum est in manu Ecclesiae aut Papae non esse statuere Articulos fidei imo nec leges morum seu bonorum operum It is certain that it is not in the hand of the Church or Pope to appoint or determine Articles of Faith nor Laws of manners or good Works First here is not a word of making new Articles or Creeds and the word statuere may as well signifie to determine a Question not yet decided as to make any thing a new but to pass these niceties and shew clearly the Doctors Error I demand whether the Fathers assembled together in the Nicen Council made new Articles of Faith against the Arians whether St. Athanatius in his Creed did the like who was no Pope What the Doctors Answer is here is ours also for all and every Definition made by the Church in after Ages And I would have him to reflect that as he now cavil's at both Pope and Church for constituting new Articles so the Arians might have done against the Nicen Council and Athanasius his Creed yes and cried out Novelties novelties as loud as the Doctor In a word then I answer with St. Gregory in Ezechiel homit XVI post med pag. 1164. 6. edit Antwerp 1615. that per incrementa temporum Crevit scientia spiritalium Patrum With time Faith encreased hut how not that either the Church or Pope have Power to coin Articles at pleasure or to force Christians to the acceptance of Novelties contrary to Scripture or ancient Tradition No but the Power given them is to dispence the Mysteries of the Word of God to lay out more clearly verities contained in Scripture so the Fathers did in the Nicen Council when they defined the Son to be consubstantial with his Father which word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is never read in Scripture Finally to declare more explicitely what the Ancient Tradition of the Church and sence of the Fathers hath been within such a compass the Church holds it self when after mature deliberation it defines in Council Hence both Divines and Canonists teach that rigorously speaking the Church hath no new Articles of Faith but only a more full and explicite knowledge of that belief which anciently was among Primitive Christians yet none there is that reads our Doctor both in the page now cited and elsewhere after but must have this perswasion wrought in him that the Church and Pope may define as it were at Random make new Articles new Creeds as they list and impose them as necessary to Salvation All is false and fraudulent dealing CHAP. II. The Doctors Quotations not true His Errors concerning the Index Expurgatorius His ill dealing with Sixtus Senensis THe Doctor in his tenth page to prove our making new Articles cites Augustinus Triumphus de Anconâ—a quaest 59 Art 1 2. and pittifully abuseth that Catholick Author who in his resolution Art 1. â— concludes thus Respondeo quod hanc quaestionem determinat Augustinus libro 1. de symbolo ubi vult quod omnis symboli condendi ordinandi in sancta dei ecclesia terminatur authoritas I Answer St Austin resolves this Question lib. 1. de symbolo Where he saith That all Authority of making and setting a Symbol in order is within the bounds of the Church Mark first St. Austins words Omnis authoritas condendi ordinandi c. Then follow these other in Anconitanus his resolution wrongfully interpreted and unhandsomly mangled by the Doctor Ex his patere potest quod novum symbolum condere solum ad Papam spectat nam in symbolo ponuntur illa quae universaliter pertinent ad Christianam fidem By this you may see that to make a new Symbol belongs only to the Pope for those things are set down in a Symbol which Universally concern Christian Faith These last words which explicate both St. Austins and Anconitanus his meaning are fraudulently left out
Paul St. Peter could make Laws for the Universal Church and was St. Paul limited in this Power what then signifies this Priority and orderly Precedency in one above the other Apostles Let him declare this ingeniously bring it to a reality and prove it as it behoveth him by Scripture and that very Place he cites shall prove also that Primacy which Catholicks give to St. Peter In the interim be pleased to hear how pag. 64. he quotes St. Cyprian deunit Eccle. for equality of Power among the Apostles and deceives his Reader by concealing part and depraving the whole sence of St. Cyprians words They are long and thus Loquitur Dominus ad Petrum Ego dico tibi quia tu es Petrus super istam petram aedificabo Ecclesiam meam portae c. tibi dabo claves c. iterum eidem post resurrectionem suam dicit pasce oves meas Super illum unum aedificat Aecclesiam suam illi pascendas mandat oves suas Et quamvis Apostolis omnibus post Resurrectionem suam parem potestatem tribuat dicat sicut misit me Pater ego mitto vos c. Tamen ut unitatem manifestaret unam Cathedram constituit unitatis ejusdam originem ab uno incipientem sua Authoritate disposuit Our Lord spake unto Peter I say unto thee that thou art Peter and upon this Rock will I build my Church c. And again after his Resurrection he said unto him Feed my Sheep Upon him one alone or only he builds his Church to him he committed his Flock to be fed And although he gave after his Resurrection equal power to all the Apostles and said As my Father sent me I send you yet to manifest Unity he appointed or setled one Chair and the Origen of this Unity he ordered by his own Authority to proceed from one Now follows the Doctors words Hoc erant utique caeteri Apostoli quod fuit Petrus pariconsortio praediti honoris potestatis sed exordium ab unitate proficiscitur Primatus Petro datur ut una Christi Ecclesia Cathedra una monstretur What Peter was the other Apostles were endowed with like fellowship of Honour and Power but the beginning comes from Unity The Primacy is given to Peter that one Church of Christ and one Apostolical Chair might be manifest These last words sed exordium c. Primatus Petro datur and super illum unum as also the precedent unam Cathedram constituit which clear all the Doctor conceals Is not here plain jugling This Primacy and true Head-ship of St. Peter all Antiquity so amply confirms that Volumes might be made of their Writings See that Learned and ancient Author Optatus milevitanus lib. 2. adversus Parmenianum page with me in his works printed at Paris 1631 48. Igitur negare non potes scire te in urbe Roma Petro primam Cathedram Episcopalem esse collocatam in qua sederit omnium Apostolorum caput Petrus unde Cephas appellatus est in qua una Cathedrâ unit as ab omnibus servaretur ne caeteri Apostoli singulas sibi quisque defenderet ut jam schismaticus peccator esset qui contra singularem Cathedram alteram collocaret Ergo Cathedra una est quae est prima de dotibus sedit prior Petrus cui successit Linus Lino successit Clemens Clementi Anacletus c. The sence is Deny you can not that you know that the first Bishops Seat was placed at Rome where Peter the head of all the Apostles did sit and therefore was called Cephas This was done to prevent least any should erect another Chair against it The Seat therefore is one the first of Gifts and Graces first sate Peter Linus succeeded c. And he gives you a List of the other ensuing Popes to Siricius who sate in this Chair when Optatus lived See also that known passage of St. Hierom lib. 1. adversus Iovinianum cap. 14. circa medium in his works printed at Colen anno 1616. where after those words which Protestants usually alledge Ex aequo super eos Ecclesiae fortitudo solidetur He adds Tamen propterea inter duodecim unus eligitur ut capite constituto schismatis tollatur occasio Yet therefore among twelve one is chosen that a Head being appointed occasion of schism might be taken away See also Tertullian de pudicitia with me page 743. printed at Paris anno 1641. Qualis es evertens commutans manifestam Domini intentionem personaliter hoc Petro conferentem super te aedificabo Ecclesiam mean dabo tibi claves What a man are you overturning and changing the manifest intention of our Lord who gave to Peter personally this priviledge Upon thee will I build my Church to thee will I give the keys c. See lastly St. Cyprian to omit St. Austin de Baptismo lib. 3. cap. 17. Paris Print 1648. it is pag. 139. and 71. Epistle ad Quintum where spkeaking of St. Peters humility reprehended by St. Paul he saith Nam nec Petrus quem primum Dominus elegit super quem aedificavit Ecclesiam suam cum secum Paulus de circumcisione post modum disputaret vindicavit aliquid insolenter aut arroganter assumpsit ut diceret se primatum tenere For Peter whom our Saviour first made choice of and upon whom he built his Church did not insolently vindicate himself when Paul disputed with him concerning Circumcision or proudly said that he was superior or held the Primacy c. Endless should I be if I held on with such manifest Authorities for St. Peters Primacy and Superiority even over the Apostles If you would have more Ballarm largely furnisheth you but none me thinks goes beyond a book Printed at Paris anno 1553. the Author is a Lawyer Remundus Rufus a most Eloquent Solid and Learned man that writ against Molinaeus and so pithily defends the Popes Authority and solves all Arguments against it that I verily perswade my self had the Doctor read him he would never have troubled the World with his four forceless leaves against either Pope or Peter My task is now to solve those words of St. Cyprian which the Doctor hath pag. 64. The other Apostles were the same that St. Peter was c. add to them St. Hieroms Ex aequo c. One obvious and known distinction clears all distinguish then inter Apostolatum Primatum between Apostles-ship and Primacy and whatever the Doctor hath or can alledge falls to nothing The Apostles therefore were all equal in the Dignity and Office of their Apostles-ship or to speak with some Divines quoad clavem Doctrinae this is most true and granted But that they were all equal in Goverment in Superiority and Primacy shall never be proved so long as those words stand in the Gospel Tu es Petrus c. You will ask where I have this distinction of Apostles-ship and Primacy I Answ First out of
by Enchantment and hindred from burning by Witchcraft called for water a world of Jews being present made the signe of the Cross upon it put his finger into the Vessel of the blessed Water saying in the Name of Jesus of Nazareth whom my Fathers crucified Fiat virtus in hac aquâ ad reprobationem omnis incantationis Magiae quam hi fecerunt Let there be vertue in this water for the disolving the charms done by these men Then saith Epiphanius he took some of the water in his hand sprinkled the several enchanted Furnaces with it Et dissoluta sunt incantamenta the Witchcraft ceased the fire burned the people who saw the wonder cryed aloud one God there is who helps the Christians and so departed Add hereunto if you please a like Miracle done by Josephus upon a possessed man and with Holy Water also Epiphanius relates it in the precedent pag. 60. Joseph saith he having shut the doors took water into his hands blessed it with the signe of the Cross besprinkled the raging man with it commanded the Devil in the Name of Jesus to be gone and the possessed party was cured This Miracle saith Epiphanius the Jews knew and great talk there was of it some said Josephus had opened the Gazophilacium and finding there the Name of God writ did the wonder by force of this Name It was true he did the Miracle but not as the Jews imagined Thus Epiphanius In the last place I le give you Theodorets Testimony lib. 5. Ecclesiast histor cap. 21. in the Colen print anno 1577. pag. 312. where he tells you also how the Devil hindred fire from burning though wood of its own nature combustible was applied to it The Charm to be brief was told the Pastor who forthwith ran to the Church and commanded a little vessel of water to be given him this he put under the holy Altar falling prostrat on the ground earnestly begged of Almighty God not longer to suffer this Tyranny of the Devil c. prayer ended he made the signe of the Cross upon the water gave it to Equitius a Deacon commanding him withall speed to sprinkle the enchanted fire with it which done saith Theodoret daemon aufugit the Devil ran away the water burned like Oyl and the fire consumed the wood in a moment If any desire more for the blessing of water let him read Tertull. lib. de baptismo cap. 4. S. Ambros lib. 2. de Sacram. cap. 5. and S. Austin Tract 118. in Joannem For the blessing of Oyl and the Paschal Candle see Bellarmin above cited Let us now return to our Doctor and make my assertion good viz. That he hath not so much as a syllable of either Scripture Council or Father against the blessing of Water He cites pag. 143. S. Cyril of Jerusalem Catech. 4. Saying that in the Holy and Divine Mysteries of our Faith necessary it is to do nothing by chance or of our own heads nor without Scripture From whence our Doctor must argue thus if he proves any thing but to bless water is one of the Divine Mysteries of Faith and done by chance or of our own heads without holy Scripture Therefore 't is unwarrantable and an Invention of man only To this discourse I answer That it is neither one of the Mysteries of Faith which S. Cyril handles in the place now cited for he speaks there only of the equality of the Holy Ghost with Father and Son neither is it done by chance or of our own heads witness the Fathers already cited nor without Authority of Holy Scripture Sanctificatur autem per verbum Dei orationem saith the Apostle nor finally is it against S. Cyril who possitively to the Doctors confusion saith that water may be blessed but two leaves only before his own quotation Catech. 3. with me pag. 401. Bibliot Patrum Colen print Tom. 4. his words are Nam ut illa quae in Aris offeruntur cum natura sint pura invocatione daemonum impura efficiuntur Sic contra aqua simplex per Spiritus Sancti Christi Patris invocationem accepta virtute sanctitatem consequitur As those things which are offered on Altars he means to Idols when pure in their own nature are made impure by the invocation of Devils So on the contrary simple Water is made holy gets a sanctity by invocating the Holy Ghost Christ our Lord and his Eternal Father Had the Doctor seen this Testimony of S. Cyril he would never have troubled his Reader with the other Quotation more remote from the purpose then York is distant from London Again our Doctor excepts against S. Gregories Dialogues and unworthily stiles them Romantick stories pag. 143. I answer Had a frantick brain brought forth such an expression none would have wondered but that a grave Divine slâ—ights these books highly reverenced both by the Greek and Latin Church cannot be tollerated In a word the Doctor shall never be able with any shadow of proof to infringe their authority What therefore that Learned Saint saith of Blessed Fortunatus curing a lame man c. is as certainly true as that the Doctor err's in discrediting those Dialogues Next the good man is upon us with a jeer They throw saith he pag. 143. this Water on sick Cows horns on Childrens cradles c. Answ And did not the Christian Italicus take water also from blessed Hilario and cast it on his Enchanted stable on his bewitched Horses on his Chariot on the place or Barriers from whence he used to run Did not the Charm or Witchery cease upon this sprinkling of water In so much that all cried out Marnas victus a Christo est Christ hath conquered Marnas Most true it is no lesse a Doctor then S. Hierom relates the story in vita Hilarionis Paris print pag. 323. Our Doctor may turn to the page and if he reverences S. Hierom leave of his jeering CHAP. XXV Of the Doctors dark Divinity Of his want of Charity towards his Ancestors and all Catholicks THe Doctor ends this 11. Section pag. 144. with a piece of scarce intelligible Divinity Vpon the Sacraments saith he they are taught to rely with so little of Moral and vertuous Dispositions that the Efficacy of the one is made to lessen the necessity of the other I answer That every Sacrament except Infant Baptism requires a vertuous disposition Penance is of no Efficacy without Contrition or at least Attrition The other Sacraments styled Vivorum require per se Supernatural inherent Grace previous to their worthy receiving How therefore the Efficacy of one is made to lessen the necessity of the other is Divinity too dark to be understood The Doctor goes on The Sacraments are taught to be so effectual by an inherent Vertue that they are not so much made the Instruments of Vertue as the Suppletory Answ Still we are in a cloud To get out on 't our Doctor must unriddle this word Suppletory We say thus and speak plain Language
〈◊〉 ut dicitur cane Incomparabiliter enim pulchrior est Veritas Christianorum quam Helena Graecorum c. Such I say is my Petition presented to our Doctor and if the Love of Truth bears sway in his Breast yeeld he needs must to a speedy retractation Nothing can Retard him from so generous a Resolution but either Motives of interest drawn from a naughty World or his own once vented 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 So forsooth he hath said in his Disswasive and so it must stand though all run to Ruin and Christianity suffers The Doctor I confess hath been most Unluckily in broaching Heresies and wanting Grace to retract them Some years are now past since he was so Unfortunate as to become a Patron of the Pelagian Heresie when ex professo he Writ a Book against Original sin and stoutly defended it and being Friendly told by his own Brethren that what he said was not only opposite to Catholick Faith but also to the very Doctrine of the Church of England expresly deliver'd in her Liturgy in 39. Articles in the Office of Baptism c. He had yet the boldness to deny all and assert that the Church of England held not Original Sin though both Prince and Prelate knew then and believ'd the contrary I know not that he ever yet Recanted this Heresie if not 't is now high Time to do it and with it to Weep for the Errors in his Disswasive if he fails in both Duties the World will say and say truly that Dr. Taylor is Notior peccans quam paenitens more known for his Sin then for his Repentance and may Prudently Judge that he of all others was the unfittest Man to Write against Popery that disowns the Doctrine of his own Church unless this makes him fit that being a Pelagian his Words though he multiplies Volums will want weight against Catholicks For this is my reflection and I think a true one that this man who dar'd to say that the Church of England holds not Original Sin so plainly taught and believ'd by all will not Boggle to miscite the Fathers remote from our knowledge Read by few and Understood by fewer Farewel Gentle Reader with a thousand well-wishes for thy profitting by this Treatise I bestow as many on Dr. Taylor whose Enemy God knows I am not Nor can he think me one for laying out his Errors and telling Truth Upon this very Account he ought and I hope will to return me Thanks If now I Merit none I may hereafter have better Luck and deserve them If plain dealing may do it he shall have Reason to account me as indeed I am his Faithful True SERVANT and Friendly ADVERSARY E. W. QUOTATIONS Faulty in DOCTOR TAYLORS PREFACE To the READER TO destroy Tradition not contain'd in Scripture the Doctor cites Tertullian thus I adore the fulness of Scripture and if it be not written let Hermogenes fear the Wo that is destin'd to them that detract from or add to it I answer the Dr. turn's the true genuine sence out of this whole sentence chiefly by these guileful particles of his own making And if it be not written which seem exclusive of all unwritten tradition yet this Authority no more relates to Catholick Doctrine concerning Tradition then a Fable in Esop Briefly therefore Tertullian disputing against Hermogenes that held these visible things were created of I know not what prejacent matter speaks thus Lib. adversus Hermog Antwerp Print cap. 22. page 495. In principio c. In the beginning God made heaven and Earth then adds Adoro Scripturae plenitudinem I adore the fulness of Scripture Wherein in what doth he adore this fulness He answers Qua mihi factorem manifestat facta I adore the fulness of Scripture that doth manifest to me both the Maker and things made As who should say in this particular the Scripture is compleat and I adore its fulness c. Now these last words Qua mihi factorem c. which explain the Fathers sence our Dr. wholly omits and beguiles his Reader with these perverted particles if it be not written Tertullian after those words In Evangelio vero amplius goes on An autem de aliqua subiacenti materia facta sint omnia nusquam adhuc legi Whether all these things be made of a subjacent matter I never yet read Scriptum esse doceat Hermogenis officina Let Hermogenes his Work-house shew us that this particular is written Si non est Scriptum timeat vae illud adjicientibus aut detrahentibus destinatum If this thing now in controversie concerning the prejacent matter Hermogenes asserts be not written let him justly fear that Wo destin'd to them that detract from Scripture or add to it Here is exactly the whole context of Tertullian and it renders this sence Hermogenes holds the world made of a strange unknown matter The Scripture directly tells us how it was made and Created of nothing I adore the fulness of Scripture in this particular let therefore Hermogenes when the Scripture hath clearly said all that belongs to the first Creation of things prove by Scripture that unknown matter he defends if he cannot he may well fear that Wo threatned to such as detract from Scripture or add to it a prejacent matter never mentioned in it Judge good Reader whether this Quotation have so much as a likelyhood of gain-saying any constant received Tradition in the Church The Dr. may reply as Hermogenes added to Scripture his unknown matter so we add our unknown Traditions I answer first what Hermogenes defended was not only an addition but expresly contrary to Holy Scripture declaring that God made the VVorld of Nothing No Catholick Tradition is expresly or positively opposite to Gods written VVord unknown tradition we own not 2. Hermogenes had no such approved consent for his foolery as we have for our Catholick and ever received Tradition justly therefore did Tertullian oppugn him by the Authority of Scripture only for destitute he was of all warranted Tradition 3. The Doctrine of our Tradition not a pretended one or any superaddition of new Articles as the Dr. imputes to us is expresly allow'd of by Scripture it self the place is known 2 Thessa 2. 14. and enervates what ever hath the colour of an objection against us He cites next St. Basil de vera fide whose words are these Paris Print 1618. Tom. 2. page 251. Haud dubie manifestissimum hoc infidelitatis argumentum fuerit signum superbiae certissimum si quis eorum quae Scripta sunt aliquid velit rejicere aut eorum quae non Scripta introducere VVithout doubt this is a most manifest Argument of infidelity if one will reject any one of those things which are written these words our Dr. omits to make the Quotation sound to his sence or of those things which are not written introduce to wit into Scripture and so the St. explicates himself clearly in these following words Vehementissime
we say although the Pope cannot know by the certitude of the cause that a Saint whom he canonizeth had Charity yet he knows it by effects to wit by works famous and spoken of him quia probatio charitatis exhibitio est operis the proofs of Charity are good works and this is enough whereby he may judge c. Thus Anconitanus To what the Doctor adds of some reputed Saints for a time and afterwards burnt for Hereticks I Answer The Objection is frivolous for no one canonized or universally honoured as a Saint by the Catholick Church was ever thus dealt with Though no wonder it is that a meer cheat gain for a time an opinion of Sanctity with men over credulous and afterward have his vizard pulled off and Hypocrisy disclosed The Doctor ends his ninth Section pag. 134. with a pittifull complaint against the multitude of Holy-dayes in the Church of Rome and saith out of Gavantus that there are about two hundred Holy dayes in the whole year which is an intolerable burthen to the poor labourer that on the rest he can scarce earn his bread besides much superstition and licentiousness that fellows such disorderly festivities Answ The ignorance of our Doctor is more then intolerable who neither understands Gavantus nor the practice of our Church Strange it is that he also complained not of two hundred fasting dayes answerable to these holydayes much weakning the labouring man and consequently that the year hath more fasts and feasts in it then dayes This later is as true as what the Doctor tells us of two hundred holydayes Let him therefore know that all these holydayes which Gavantus calls feasts or are placed in the Calender in red letters are not dayes of precept obliging poor labourers to desist from servile work but are styled feasts upon this account that the Church keeps a memory of so many blessed Saints in order with Office and Mass More then the most of them hinder no manual work nor lay any obligation on the labouring man Hence his argument of ease and licentiousness accompanying these festivities is made null Only thus much it proves that one may innocently smile at the Doctors skill in what he writes against CHAP. XXII Adjuration of Devils approv'd by the ancient Church and authority of Fathers The Doctor cannot except against our Catholick Exorcisms NOw to the Doctors 10. Section pag. 135. where God bless us he is resolved to be Tragical and passionately to act against all Exorcisms and conjuring of Devils For answer I le give him these few Considerations which perhaps may conjure him to silence hereafter on this Subject And first it is an eternal shame for a Doctor of Divinity to rayl with open mouth against all Exorcism's seeing we are ascertain'd that not only Christ our Lord impowered his own Disciples to cast out Devils but the Ancient Church likewise possitively prescribed a Form of Exorcism This we have in the 4th Council of Carthage celebrated in the year 398. and approved by Leo the third cap. 7. Exorcista saith the Council cum ordinatur accipiat de manu Episcopi libellum in quo Scripti sunt Exorcismi dicente sibi Episcopo Accipe commenda memoriae habeto potestatem imponendi manus super energumenum sive baptizatum sive Catechumenum Let the Exorcist when he is ordained take a book from the hand of the Bishop wherein the Exorcisms are writ the Bishop saying take this Book and commit it to memory and receive power to lay thy hands upon the possessed person whether Baptized or Catechumen Thus said the Ancient Church even when our Protestants say it was without error yet now up starts a new fashioned Doctor in a corner of the world brim full of anger and must needs vent it against these sacred rites Exorcism's forsooth with him are horible impiety a Conjugation of evils Incantations Diabolical charms and what not Well for adjuring of Devils and casting them out of possessed persons we have both the Practice and Authority of the most Ancient Fathers that ever lived in the Church I 'le give you a few and for others remit you to Pamelius his notes upon Tertullian de Baptismo pag. with me 468. printed at Antwerp Anno 1584. daemones saith Tertullian in his Apologet adv Gent. cap. 31. pag. 74. id est genios adjurare consuevimus ut illos ab hominibus exigamus Devils or Genii we haue a custome to adjure that we may drive them from men Again cap. 37. pag. 78. Quis autem vos ab illis c. who is there that will free you from the incursions of Devils which we without reward drive away And in his Book de Praeseip cap. 41. p. 400. He blames certain women for using Exorcisms Add to Tertullian a Father yet more ancient Justinus Martyr in his works printed at Paris an 1615. Apologia prima pro Christianîs pag. 45. Complures saith the Saint daemonum intemperijs correptos per orbem omnem hanc vestram vrbem c. You have many seized on by Devils the whole world over yes and in this your City which your Conjurers and Witches could not help and not a few of our men Per nomen Jesu Christi su◠Pontio Pilato Crucifixi adiurantes sanarunt c. Have by adjuring them in the Name of Christ Jesus Crucified cured them have disarmed these Devils and cast them out of those possessed men The like we read in S. Justins Dialogue cum Tryphone Judaeo with me in the same edition pag. 147. hodie quoque illi per nomen Jesu Christi adjurati nobis parent c. and at this day those infernall Spirits adjured by the name of Jesus Christ with fear and trembling obey us Read also S. Cyprian printed at Paris ann 1648. ad Demetrianum pag. 236. O si audire eos velles saith the St. videre quando à nobis adjurantur torquentur spiritualibus flagris verborum tormentis de obsessis corporibus ejiciuntur quando ejulantes gementes voce humana potestate divina flagella verbera sentientes venturum judicium confitentur O Demetrian if thou wouldst hear and see when those evil Spirits are conjured by us and vexed by our spiritual scourges and the torment of those words we speak being cast out of possessed bodys if thou didst but hear and see when howling and sighing like men they feel our stripes and lashes and confess a day of judgement to come c. Veni cognosce come and know these wonders to be true which we here relate Thus S. Cyprian Here are adjurations here are spiritual scourges here are sacred words here are Devils cast out of possessed bodys howling and crying by the power of God at these adjurations and speaking of words Let the Doctor speak out and tell us plainly if he dares with any conscience say that all this is nothing but Diabolical charming and horrible impiety Would he please to credit me I might tell him a
God in the operation of Sacraments is the prime efficient cause of Grace Christ the Meritorious Sacraments the Instrumental Now whether they work by an intrinsecal Vertue imprinted as it were on them or are otherwise effectual concerns nothing Catholick Religion Supernatural inherent Grace we receive by them when a soul is fitly disposed This is our Doctrine Yet we have more obscure Divinity For he tells us we teach that Sacraments are not so much to increase Grace as to make amends for the want of Grace God only knows what he means by this making amends for the want of Grace I do not Qui potest capere capiat We say without this making amends that Grace is effectually given in every Sacrament to that soul that comes worthily disposed The Doctor in his 12. Section page 144. talks of Idolatry but not understanding what Idolatry is nor our Divines Tenets concerning the Worship he speaks of fights against shadows I 'll only leave him to Mr. Thorndike a great Divine of his own to learn of him what Idolatry is and how far the Church of Rome is to be charg'd with it and what the consequences of such a charge will be Mr. Thorndike in his just Weights and Measures chap. 1. discourseth it at large He says pag. 2. If the Pope be Antichrist and the Papists Idolaters we need not seek farther for the reason of the distance we are to own the separation for our own act and glory in it He says again pag. 7. If it be true viz. That the Papists be guilty of Idolatry we cannot without renouncing our Christianity hold communion with those whom we charge with it So that if this Section of our Doctor which charges us with Idolatry be true Mr. Thorndike tells him there is no need of seeking farther for the reason of the distance This must be it viz. That they could not hold communion with Idolaters without renouncing their Christianity and therefore they parted which separation they own for their own act and glory in it Yet Mr. Thorndike sayes that if this be the best reason they can give for their separation they must acknowledge themselves to be the Schismaticks His own words are Cap. 1. pag. 7. line 14. For in plain Termes we make our selves Schismaticks by grounding our Reformation upon this pretence and again in the same page line 29. So that sayes he should this Church declare that the charge which we call Reformation is grounded upon this Supposition I must then acknowledge that we are the Schismaticks Now that this Pretence and this Supposition are the same which our Doctor in his Section pretends and supposes us to be guilty of viz. Idolatry is evident by the whole Chapter now quoted and by the Contents of it printed before the Chapter which end thus They that separate from the Church of Rome as Idolaters are thereby Schismaticks before God How the Doctor will answer this to his own brother I neither know nor care nor can I see how he can possibly avoid the Imputation of Schism in Mr. Thorndik's judgment for he believes or else he cheats his Charge that we are Idolaters if he does he must in Mr. Thorndikes Opinion and in all reason make that the ground of his Separation And if he does do so he is a Schismatick before God sayes Mr. Thorndike This may serve for answer to his charge in general His particular Instances in what we are Idolaters are Worshipping of Images sayes he is a direct breach of the Second Commandment an act of Idolatry as much as the Heathens themselves were guilty of c. Mr. Thorndike shall answer for us again in the Book before cited Cap. 19. in the Contents whereof you may read this Proposition Reverencing of Images in Churches is not Idolatry In this Chapter page 126. towards the bottome he has these words Whether or no having Images in Churches be a breach of the Second Commandment can be no more question then whether or no to have any Images be a breach of it for it must forbid Images in Churches because it forbids all Images c. This and what follows in that chap. clears the having of Images in Churches from being a breach of the Second Commandment Now to clear the Reverencing or Worshipping of them from being Idolatry read the same Chapter on and page 127. line 31. you shall find these words But to the Images of Saints there can be no Idolatry so long as men take them sor Saints That is Gods creatures Much less to the Images of our Lord For it is the honour of our Lord and not of his Image And again line the last of this page and page 128. Nay the Council it self meaning the 2. of Nice though it acknowledge that the Image it self is honoured by the honour given to that which it signifieth before the Image yet it distinguisheth this honour from the honour of our Lord and therefore teacheth not Idolatry by teaching to honour Images though it acknowledge that the Image it self is honoured when it need not This is quite contrary to our Doctors Divinity The pious Children of the Church of England may believe which they please of these two great Divines the one is a Bishop but the other seems the more wary man For he makes a cautious proposal in the 1 Chap. of his Book quoted before page 2. line 14. It were good sayes he that we did understand one another And line 30. Yet it is necessary to provide that we contradict not our selves But our Doctor never caring whom he understands or who understands him thinks it not necessary to provide that they contradict not one another But rashly sayes what comes next right or wrong What he hath more pag. 145 146 147. relate chiefly ad modum colendi or to the way of Worship which toucheth nothing on Catholick Religion or the due reverence given to Images Divines I know dispute this point largely their different Opinions make no Article of Faith Let us agree that Images are to be worshipped in the Sense of those Fathers we cited above and in Mr. Thorndikes Sense And afterward if the Doctor please we 'll discuss the Theological Difficulty how they are to be worshipped To what our Doctor has page 148. concerning the Idolatry of worshipping Consecrated Bread and Wine Mr. Thorndike shall once more answer for us who by good luck has the very Instance of the Pagans worshipping the Sun which our Doctor sayes is all one with our worshipping the Consecrated Bread and Wine But Mr. Thorndike I dare say will not believe him until he answers the beginning of his 19. Chap. quoted before page 125. the Contents of which at the very beginning have this Proposition The worship of the Host in the Papacy is not Idolatry If our Doctor will undertake to satisfie Mr. Thorndike that he is mistaken in what he here professes to teach I presume he will oblige him highly For he asks pag. 5. line 22.
pitty poured out in his own Pallace in the sight of the Sun and open view of the World it yet draws sighs from many a heart speaks loud enough of a Prince more horridly deposed and murthered then ever yet came to the knowledge of Christians or any Mariana once thought of And who were the Actors in this Abominable Tragedy Men of a reformed Faith and did it not in a sudden passion but deliberately which aggravates the crime while Catholicks ever loyal to their Sovereign look'd on with weeping eyes and heavy hearts Who approved who applauded that dayes sinful work Those of the same bran John Milton was one witness his wicked Book against Salmatius whose only praise is to speak Treason in good Latine What Doctors have we found among Catholicks since the death of our Sovereign that either side with Milton or speak a syllable in defense of those Regicides not one All unanimously cry shame upon them curse and anathematize the Fact and say t' was damnable Now after this so crying a Sin to hear a Doctor harp upon the far lesser faults of Mariana Santarel what is it but a weak and too splenish a Recrimination They said ill Be it so if yet Mariana said it their Doctrine is therefore prohibited and lies under censure but have they either said or done like these now mentioned What I say is not to touch in the least any Protestant loyal to his Sovereign No but only to tell the Doctor he did not well to rub on old Soars in others abroad while he hath more festered Vlcers to look on and Lance in some of his own Brethren at home I say in some for innumerable were Loyal and those I touch not Charity therefore might well have told him that the fault of a few is never to be cast on the greater part who were innocent and harmless Now concerning the Loyal fidelity both of English and forreign Catholicks towards their Prince and Magistrate could I license this short Treatise to grow to a greater bulk much might be said though indeed there is already enough published by that learned Author of the Protestants Apology the Book is had in England printed anno 1608. where Tract 3. Sect. 3 4 5. pag. 658 663 667. You shall find the Loyalty of Catholicks if Reason Authority and Confession of Adversaries may have place strongly asserted Beside other undenyable proofs he observs page 662. that when Queen Elizabeth enentred the Throne Royal all received her with most dutiful submission The then Catholick Lord Archbishop and chancellor of England in a publick oration perswaded the people to acknowledg her Maiesty for their lawful Queen and Sovereign And a like Loyal respect she had from other Catholick Lords and Bishops c. But was it so when queen Mary that reigned before her came to the Crown No saith my Author open rebellion in open field Stow recounts it in his Annals the pages are there exactly cited was her publick welcome and there was more of it in her 5. Years then in 25. of Queen Elizabeth and private turbulent Spirits witness that Dagger thrown at one Preachers head at Pauls Cross and a Gun shot off at another gave her no better entertainment Parallel here the Receptions of these two Sovereigns and say candidly who were then forwardly submissive who untowardly rebellious Nay shall I say more parallel the hideous A little Book in English cal'd Ierusalem and Babel or the Image of both Churches printed at London 1653. the 2d Edition will help you to make this parallel horrid and out-crying Rebellion of such as have deserted their Ancient Faith the whole World over with the faults of Catholicks for all are not faultless you shal find as great a disparity as is betwixt a little Skirmish and a fierce fought battle the half drawing of a Sword and sheathing it in the bowels of an Innocent man See for this Assertion the Protestants Apology Tract 3. Sect. 2. pag. 649. but chiefly in his Preface to the Reader from pag. the 10. to the end From this most Learned and Laborious Writer I will borrow some few of those many Instances he hath in that Preface to answer a pithless cavil of our Doctor p. 171. Where He dares not deny but that some Calvinists and warm spirited Puritans may have been reprehensible atleast Catholicks recriminate them in this point yet he gravely adds That indeed they borrowed these Doctrines from Rome using their Arguments making use of their Expressions and pursuing their Principles Answ And is it possible can a Doctor talk thus Can sober men give credit to his Obloquy Pray you tell me when the Waldenses in France the Hussites in Bohemia the Wicleffians in England some make these men Protestants ranted and vapour'd as they did contemned Magistrates raised up Rebellion and acted so Tragically against their lawful Governors c. Did Rome learn them their Lesson did Rome teach them the Dotage to contemn Roman Discipline When that Hector-rampant Zisca the Hussites General after the Ravage and Violences done on his own Native Country falling sick commanded his skin to be pull'd of his dead Carkass and a Drum to be made of it which the Hussites should use afterward in Battel Had he think yea Breve from Rome to do this more then Scithian cruelty on himself When Martin Luther Dogmatically taught That amongst Christians no man ought to be Magistrate none Superior and being told that he troubled the World with his new Gospel c. He returned this accursed Answer Quereris quod per Evangelium nostrum c. Thou complainest that by our Gospel the World is become tumultuous I answer God be thanked for it I would have it so wo to me He might have added and to my Kate also if things were not as they are all in tumults When I say such Malice against Rome boyled hot at his heart and the filthy froth of his rage ran thus out of his mouth did Rome add fuel to that flame or make that Vessel of iniquity to boyl as it did Apage Nugas 'T is triffling to say so Again when sneveling Calvin to say nothing of Zuinglius seditiously vented That Earthly Princes bereaved themselves of Authority if they were against God and that they are unworthy to be reckon'd amongst the number of men that we may spit in their faces so this holy faced man speaks rather then obey them Did Rome either instil such Poyson into his Breast or lay that Venom on his pernitious Tongue No God knows both Rome and the Rhemish Doctors assert that Christians are obliged in Conscience to obey even Heathen Emperors And worthy Doctor Kellison doubts not to say That Faith is not necessary to Jurisdiction Temporal neither is Authority lost by the loss of Faith See these Authorities quoted in the Protestants Apology Tract 3. Sect. 5. pag. 668. Once more and I end When bloody Beza preaching at Grenoble with his Sword and Pistol exhorted the