5. Indeed your Religion consisteth of one point absolutely and simply Papall supremacy and we doubt not but if that were overthrowne all the Fabrick of your late Roman erection would quickly fall to the ground yet the Catholick faith is not such it consisteth not of one only article neither is it everthrowne by the intrusion of every errour for this being granted if we can shew you the time when Indulgences g Roââens Art 18. In principio nascentis Ecclesiae nullus fuit Indulgentiarum vsus or any other errour crept into the Church of Rome you must then conclude catholick religion throughout the world was overthrowne a conclusion forced from shame And let all men judge whether this be not a desperate advantage given to free himselfe from the present danger Neither can the Iesuite from his confidence of Roman puritie glory as he heere hath done in regard he seemeth to have changed his opinion before hee printed halfe his booke curbing his lavishnes and making the Church of Rome free not from all errours as heere he doth but from spots of misbeliefe only h Sect 9. which I feare he will be forced to flye vnto hereafter when hee shall examine his owne iollity in this particular For who brought in that doctrine that the Pope is Lorâ over all or did extend Indulgences to your Purgatory flames but Boniface the 8 if wee beleive your owne Agrippa i De vanitat scient cap 61. Hic est ille magnus Bonifacius quia tria magna grandia fecit primum falso oraculo deluso Clemente persua sit sibi cedere Apostolatum secundum condidit sextum Decretalium Papam asseruit omnium Dominum tertium instituit Iubilaeum indulgentiarum nundinas illasque primus in Purgatorium extendit Besides this in Leo k Ser. 4 de quadragesima Cùm ad tâgendum infidelita tem suam nostris audeant interesse mysteriis ita in Sacramentorum communione se temperant interdum ut tutius lateant ore indigno Christi corpus accipiunt sanguinem autem redemptionis nostrae haurire omnino declinant the great his time it was a note of a Maniche to communicate in one kinde yet now wee fee it is practifed by them which would perswade the world that they are Catholickes and although they may quarrell that the cause is different yet they may see the act of omission onely condemned by Leo the Pope Also in the Primitive times the Sacrament was received by the faithfull in both kindes in the Greeke Church till Cassanders l Consult Art 22. initio Satis compertum est vniversalem Christi Ecclesiam in hunc vsque diem Occidentalem vero seu Romanam mille amplius à Christo annis in solenni praesertim ordinaâia huius Sacramenti dispensatione vtramque panis vini speciem omnibus Ecclesiae Christi membris exhibuisse time in the Westerne or Roman Church for above a 1000 yeares and yet in the Councell of Constance Henricus de Piro Iohannes de Scribanis m Concil Constantien Sess 13. apud Binium stiled it Mos perversus and the whole Councell decreed against it Concupiscence the Apostle calleth sinne but yet it is now no doctrine of the Roman Church for the contrary is decreed in the Trend Councell n Concil Trident. Sess 5. Hanc concupiseentiam quam aliquando Apostolus peââatum appeilat fancta synodus declarat Ecclesiam Catholicam nunquam intellexisse peccatum appellaâi quod verè propriè in renatis peccatum sit sed quââ ex peccato est ad peccatum inclinat Si quis autem contrarium senserit anathema sit And many more may bee found out if I did desire to muster vp your iniquities in this kinde But it shall suffice for the present to referre the Iesuite and the Reader to the Catalogue of the right reverend the Lord Bishop of Derry o Lib. 3. de Antich cap 6. Catalogus veterum haeresum quas Ecclesia Romana renovââit c. which when Mr Malone or his whole Tribe hath fully answered I may conceive he had something besides his wilfulnes to breed his confidence in this opinion In his examination of the second exception against the Demaund hee hopeth to enervate it by his observations therevpon the first whereof is that therein the Answerer supposeth our catholicke Doctrine to bee that Apostasie which the Apostle speaketh of 1. Tim. 4. 1. 2. p Reply pag. 5. And here our Iesuite wisely collecteth for the learned Primate doth neither acknowledge your Roman Church either in Diocesse or ad extra for Catholick neither your additions mixtures for Catholick Doctrine any more then Saul * 1. Sam. 10. 11 for a Prophet because he got amongst the Prophets as your deceipts have crept into the Creed But yet that by your corrupt mixtures and declinings is truly accomplished that Prophecy 1 Tim 4. hee makes little doubt And what abuse is done heerein to your glorious Synagogue why should not false doctrines and novelties fall before the auncient and radicall truth as Dagon â and false gods before the Arke Nay what doth the learned * 1. Sam. 5. 3. 4. Primate suppose that was not deprecatively expressed in your Trent-Councell by a Bishop q Cornelius Bishop of âiton â0 of your owne for if to fall from Religion to Superstition from Faith to infidelitie from Christ to Antichrist bee not an Apostasie let the Iesuite declare what it is But the Iesuite would faine know in what sence wee take Apostasie whether as it designeth an vtter Revolt from the faith of Christ which the Iesuite is confident they cannot bee charged withall Because elsewhere the learned Primate confesseth that men dying as hee saith in our Religion doe dye vnder the mercy of God r Reply pag. 5. What doth the Iesuite meane by this Doth he thinke the most learned Answerer by their Religion did poynt out Ignatius his plat-forme or the Religion of their Holies Francis and Dominick Were any of their other Religions conjectured at which are imployed to frame Christ a Religion by policie that their Master might obtaine a Monarchie by fraude Surely whatsoever the Iesuite may conjecture these will finde but little shelter for their securitie in that sermon But if this Interpretation square not who doth hee then meane by men dying in our Religion if those that lived in the Roman Communion then his collection is vayne also For who can doubt that some may bee saved there without casheering of the Apostasie tâeâce Many followed Absalom * 2 Sam. 15. 11. that were true of heart and yet the Iesuite will not deny a Rebellion against David and falling away of the People from him The high places were not taken away and yet Asa's â â Chron 25. 17. heart and many others no doubt were vpright all their dayes Iudas * Acts 1. 18. may betray Christ and hang Demas â 2
given them for godly men what is affirmed here but that the fathers looking alwayes to the advancement of Religion fought couragiously against all that openly crossed the same yet might which is not absolutely affirmed but peradventure sleepe whilst poysonous seeds that carried a semblance of Devotion were sowen or have some hand vnawares no way intending hurt but good to the Church of God to bring them in And that there is nothing spoken to the derogation of the Fathers pietie or godlines I thinke any man but Mr Malone will easily conceive For what offence hath this learned observation committed Is any ignorant that wicked wretches may bring good to the Church who never intended it as Iehu * â King 10 18. 31. Iudas and all preachers for gaine c. and that good men might trouble the Church and broach errors in it and thinke thereby they have done God service as m Euseb eccli hist lib 3. Iraeneus n ibid. lib 7. Cyprian c. and yet some of them have beene by your selves acknowledged for Saints and Martyrs But while the true mens cause is pleading the Theife must not escape We acknowledge it an easie matter to excuse the Fathers of this Apostasie but how will Mr Malone free his owne For although he may dare and outface much yet it is manifest that their cloystered cattell and those of the like hiew are pointed out by the Apostle to be principall Engineres for bringing it in And this is so plainely descried that every simple lay-man by this place * 1. Tim. 4. 2. 3. can paint them out for how are those Hypocrites which speake lyes in Hypocrisie by whom this Apostasie shal be brought in discovered but by these two open and declaring notes of forbidding marriage and abstainning from meats Things which agree so fairely with the cloystered and Romish Cleargie that if we should plead any interest therein we should be cryed downe for sleepers whilst this Towre was in building And although we are charged with Apostasie by the Iesuite yet being examined by the Apostles notes wee shall escape very well For M. Malone knoweth that Delectus ciborum is no article of our Creed nor point of our practise And from the second marke he hath better reason to excuse vs for I cannot doubt but hee that knowes our wives haue kirtles o Reply pag. 206. hath surely observed that our Preists have wives But let the Apostle vse what notes he pleaseth the Iesuite will prove that we are guiltie of Apostasie how because wee have revolted and departed from the Roman Church for which he vrgeth Calvins p Absurdum est postquam discessionem à toto mundo facere coacti sumus inter ipsa principia alios ab a liis dissilire Cal ep 141. confession but if here be not lyes in Hypocrisie where are they to be found For that which he cites from Calvin acknowledgeth onely that they were forced to make a departure from the whole world when as the Iesuite would have him that died long before the most reverend Primate was borne voluntarily to acknowledge that the learned Answerer c. did depart from the Roman Church q Reply pag. 6. But pardon this escape Is there no difference to be forced to depart and voluntarily to make a schisme y Aug. de Bap. con Donat lib 5. Cap 1. Apertissimum enim sacrilegium omines schismatis si nulla ãâã ãâã seperatiâââ to be driven from you by your corrupt doctrines that you will not reforme and with pertinacy and wilfulnes to embrace heresies Wee have washed alone because you will not be cleane and because your Naaman Å¿ Dried de Ecâl dog lib â cap 4. Neque tenentur oves subesse Pastori vlli qui iam sactus est aut ex pastore lupus aut saluti gregis contrarius will not wash in Iordan must we adhere to your Leprosy still He is the Schismaticke that causeth t Cassan consult Art 7. de Ecclesia vera Neque vnquam credo controversia apud nos de externa Ecclesiae vnitate extitisset nisi Pontifices Romani â hâc authoritate ad dominationis quandam speciem abusi â fuissent eamque extra fines a â Christo Ecclesia praescriptos ambitionis et cupiditatis causâ extulissent the schisme and we are confident that it was no more revolting u Cypr. epist 63. Non debemus attendere quid alius ante nos faciendum putaverit sed quid qui ante omnes âst Christus prior fecent neque enim hominis consuetudinem sequi oportet sed DEI veritatem for vs to leave your corruptions then for the Exorcists to fire their bookes * Act 19. 19. and to reject their impieties And although I will not deny but we were in this manner forced to forsake your corruptions yet our Iesuit proves it but vntowardly by Calvins confession for if the world and the Church of Rome be the same with the Iesuite why might not we conclude from his Baptisme and entring the Cloyster but by vowing to forsake the world in the one and departing from it in the other hee hath revolted and apostated from the Roman Church his Catholicke Brethren But is not the Iesuite pittifully distressed that would from a Schisme falsly pretended to be confessed by Calvin prove vs guiltie of the grand Apostasie mentioned by the Apostle Now the Iesuite thinking that wee would have swallowed his follie and answered him some other way laboureth to prevent vs by crossing that which his Conscience told him would make for our just defence for saith he Neither can it suffice them to say that they departed from the Church of Rome because she her selfe had gone out of the true Church vnlesse they declare vnto vs what true church that was out of which the said Roman Church departed x Reply pag. 7. As if this were hard to be done What is the Catholicke Church doe you know it not that pretended one contracted in a small compasse by Roman ligatures but that trulie Catholicke dispersed over the âace of the earth â Cassand consult art 7. Veteres potissimum Catholicam dictam volunt quod per vniversum orbem diffusa sit This is that you have falne from and like Donaâisâs y Alphons de Castro advers Haer lib 5. de Eccles Ab Ecclesia se divisit dicens in sola parte Donati esse veram Ecclesiam in alijs autem partibus quae Ceciliano favebant non esse Ecclesiá quia etsi ibi aliqui essent boni communione tamen malorum maculabantur ita Ecclesia peribat have condemned her in her particular members as if no salvation were to be had but with you z Extrav de maior obed cap vnam sanctam Subesse Romano Pontifici omni humanae creaturae declaramus dicimus definimus pronunciamus omnino esse de necessitate salutis Bellar de eccl
who being not justified doe dye are appointed for euerlasting punishments By which it is evident that the fiction of Purgatory is not to be admitted but in the truth it is determined that every one ought to repent in this life to obtaine remission of his sinnes by our Lord Iesus Christ if he will be saved And let this be the end This compendious and briefe Confession of vs we conjecture wil be a contradiction to them who are pleased to slander maliciously accuse vs and vnjustly persecute vs But we trust in our Lord Iesus Christ and hope that he will not relinquish the cause of his faithfull ones nor let the rod of wickednes lye vpon the lot of the righteous Dated in Constantinople in the Moneth of March 1629. CYRILL Patriarch of Constantinople OVr Iesuite is charged by the most reverend Primate Some things are maintained by you which have not beene delivered for Catholicke Doctrine in the primitive times but brought in afterwards your selves know not when The Iesuite pumping for an answere herevnto talketh of ambiguity doubtfull phrases fighting in a cloud As if a man could deale more plainely with the Roman faction then to tell them that there are many points held now of faith by them which the first times never received for Catholicke doctrine and that they themselves know not when many of them were first broached in the Roman Church But the Iesuite fearing least he should be espied in opposing so manifest a truth would here raife a myst or fogge that he might the better steale out of danger for he indeavoureth to perswade That by those words the Answerer goeth about to make his simple Reader beleive that we maintaine doctrine contrary to that of primitive times because forsooth we maintaine now somethings which were not expresly declared nor delivered as necessary articles of Christian faith c Reply pag. 11 He were a simple reader indeed that would beleive this Iesuite either in his faith or doctrine if it have no better support then the declaration of some of their late Councels to confirme it But he were more then simple that can pick the Iesuite his collection from the learned Answerer his words Simple men interprete the Bels as they imagine and imagination hath directed the Iesuite heere and not the truth For what hath the words of the most reverend Primate to doe with the species of opposition where chargeth he you with maintaining doctrine contrarie to that of primitive times where doth he insinuate so much He that discovered your intrufions to have been brought in vnder the name of Piety was not so forgetfull to judge those points contrary to the received doctrine of faith You teach new faith this is the charge You deny not the old professedly in any point this were too grosse and fit for the fooles your brethren open Heretickes and not for the wisest sonne that can promote his fathers kingdome by a more secret and mysticall fraud So that let his words be softer then oyle or sharper then darts I am sure heerein the Iesuite fayles when hee thinketh them to be shot at the innocent The Iesuite would speake more to purpose to free himselfe and his faction and to this end he delivereth to us two propositions 1. We maintaine some things as Articles of faith which were not in primitive times expressely determined declared delivered for such And 2. Wee maintaine some things as articles of our faith which are contrary to that which hath beene declared for Catholick doctrine in primitive times would have vs know that there is a great difference betwixt these two sayings d Ibid. But as the Iesuite granteth the former to be true of themselves so the most learned Answerer in this place doth not charge them with this latter at all For I doubt not but that the most reverend Primate will yeeld so farre vnto you that in shew at least you holde the Apostles Creed and with the Pharisees give it the first place of honour as they Moses law yet notwithstanding your additions have cast contumely many times vpon the ancient faith as Pharisaicall traditions vpon Moses law * Mat. 25. â 9. That which Roffensis sayth may be acknowledged in a right sence that there were many points universally held by the Primitive Church in beleife and practise the which with explanation were defended against contradicting Hereticks that arose in after-times But what is this to new doctrine never universally received nor anciently knowne or what argument is heere perswading you to declare that for ancient faith which was never delivered from the Apostââs c. or received by the Primitive Church But the Iesuite that he might gaine credit to his first proposition tels vs. Before the Nicen Councell some books of Canonicall Scripture were doubted of yea and rejected from the Canon by some of the Ancient without any blame at all which after the said Councel could not lawfully be called in quèstioÌ e Reply pag. 11 And all to very little purpose For first the Nicene Councell did not declare doubtfull books for Canonical Scripture nor point out the Canon which the Catholick Church did universally receive neither doth it make at all against their universall receipt of those bookes that some privat men or Church doubted of or rejected them For the Iesuite will have his doctrine generally received if affirmed by ten or eleven Fathers â Valentia if by the choysest Why shall f Reply pag. 94 not Gods booke have equall priviledge with a Papall Indulgence when the first is acknowledged in a manner by most this never taken notice of nor acknowledged at all Besides suppose that some private men or some few Churches did not receive some booke of the Canon yet this can no way hinder the universal receipt of the whole more then a mountaine or a wave the Globes roâundity Secondly although they were not blame worthy as the Iesuite would have it which should not receive some bookes of the New Testament which is false yet they were not without blemish for if it were an honour to the Iewes especially to the tribes of Iudah Benjamin that to them wholly intirely were commended the Oracles of God * Rom. 3 2. it must needes bee a dishonour to the ten tribes to have rejected all but the five bookes of Moses Thirdly although those bookes were doubted of yet they were doubtingly received for you cannot finde them by any Church canonically rejected Fourthly it had bin as foule an errour to have decreed any thing against the authority of those books before the Nicen Councel as afterwards For if the Iesuit will take it to bee such a tye that all are bound to stand vnto the declaration of a Councel why did not the Councel of Laodicea f Carran in sum Concilâ can 59. performe their obligatioÌ but in the repetition of the Canon leave the book of Iudith to be placed amoÌgst the Apocrypha not
Churches under Popish government have beene for many hundred of yeares without vulgar Bibles approoved and appointed to be read of the people whereby they might be exercised in the like auncient Christian duty doth it not then follow that let our custome bee what it will they denying free libertie unto the people to reade them without dispensation disagree herein from the practise of the auncient Church although wee doe not point out the Pope that did first seale up this treasure from the people and consequently that the Iesuites demaund is vaine Yet the Iesuite continueth his pursuite and his Vanitie also By an other instance saith hee no lesse vaine then the former he endeavoureth to tell us againe how wee differ from the middle ages of the Church u Reply pag. 27 If no more vaine then the former the learned Answerer needeth not to feare well where is this enclosure of Vanity I heare S. Hierome say The Church doth read indeede the bookes of Iudith and Toby and the Mâchabees but doth not receive them for canonicall scripture x Hieronym Praesat in libros Salomon Epist 113. I see that at this day the Church of Rome receiveth them for such May not I then conclude saith the most learned Primate y In his Answer to the Iesuites Challenge pag 9. that betwixt S. Hierome's time and ours there hath beene a change and that the Church of Rome now is not of the same judgement with the Church of God then howsoever I cannot precisely lay downe the time wherein shee first thought her selfe to bee wiser herein then her fore-fathers What Vanity can the Iesuite espye heere why saith hee Our Answerer playeth Bopeepe with his Reader affecting ignorance to wrong the truth for well hee knoweth that the same S. Hierome not long after did testifie unto the world that the first Nicen Councell declared the booke of Iudith for Canonicall which hee had not heard of when hee wrote the former words alledged by our Answerer z Reply pag. 2â Here the Iesuite had need to be active for his weapons are but reedes The place he urgeth is Hierome in the prologne to the booke of Iudith And surely there will bee small grounds to make Iudith reputed canonicall in Hierome's time Paula and Eustochium desired Hierom to translate this booke of Iudith into Latine where by the way you may see if you make it canonicall Scripture wee may conclude a woman might have and reade the same in the vulgar tongue to whom St Hierome answereth that among the Hebrewes tht booke of Iudith was taken amongst the holy writings but yet of no authoritie to resolve a controversie being written in the Chaldey reckoned among the Histories yet because it is read that the Nicene Councell did take this booke in the number of the sacred Scriptures hee did yeild to translate the same a Hiero in Prolog ad librum Iudith Apud Hebraeos liber Iudith inter Hagiographa legitur cujus autoritas ad roboranda illa quae ad contentionem veniunt minus idonea judicatur Chaldaeo tamen sermone conscriptus inter historias computatur Sed quia hunc librum Synodus Nicena in numero sanctarum Scripturarum legitur compu tâsse acquicri postulationi vestrae imo exactioni But where was it read non ex canone de sacris libris confecto not out of the Canon made up of the holy bookes b Baronius in appendice decimi tomi notatione ad annum 32 Haud affirmandum omnino existimarem Canonem de libris sacris statutum esse à Nicaeno Concilio à quo neminem ausum fuisse recedere jure debet existimari Sed non ex Canone de sacris libris consecto id asseruisse S. Hieronymum verum potius ex actis cjus in quibus obiter citatus idem liber inventus âuit this Baronius affirmeth where then in some obscure pamphlet for any thing the Iesuit knoweth and so farre was St Hierome from testifying to the world what the Iesuite so confidently affirmeth that it cannot be manifested St Hierome gave any credite to what he saith was onely read Yea their owne Lindanus from St Hieromes uncertaine manner of Speech Legitur computâsse seemeth to conclude that St Hierome beleived it not though he might reade it c Lindan Panopl Evangel l. 3. c. 3. Vehementer ut dubitem facit quod apud Hieronymum Praefat in Iudith reperitut paulâ cost Sed legitur computasse ait Hiero. quod mihi dubitantis suspicionem subindicate videtur and saith if the Nicene Councell did aunciently reckon the booke of Iudith in the Canon why did not the Councell of Laodicea reckon it why did not Nazianzene make mention of it What meant the same St Hierome to say the Church at that time did reade the bookes of Iudith Tobic and the Maccabees but did not receive them amongst the Canonicall Scriptures d Idem ibid. Si Niâaena Synodus olim hunc Iudith librum cum alijs in Canonem redegerat cur annis 80. post âum non accenset Laodicaena cur Nazianzenus ejus non meminit paulo post Quid sibi vult quod idem Hieron in librorum Salomoniâ praefatione scribit Ecclesiam libros Iudith Thobiae ac Machabeorum legere quidem sed inter canonicas scripturas non recipere And Erasmus in his Censure upon this Prologue saith that St Hierome doth not affirme the booke of Iudith to have beene approoved in the Nicene Synode â Censura Prologi ad librum Iudith Non affirmat approbatum hunc in Synodo Nicaena sed ait legitur computâsse So that it is most apparant who it is that playeth Bopeepe with his Reader that affecteth ignorance to wrong the truth Further what did St Hierome afterwards that might cause the Iesuite to conceive it in his subsequent esteeme Canonicall He translated it but did he not the like to others which he denyeth to be in the Canon and where then is his retractation which hee ought to have performed for abusing the Canonicall booke of Iulith if he had committed violence against Gods sacred truth Neither ought it to amaze the Reader that this booke should be said to be taken in the number of sacred writings for who knowes not that Bookes were esteemed Hagiographa holy and divine from their matter and in opposition to prophane writings and yet were farre from the authoritie of the Canon And if it be a true rule that one falshood makes the whole testimonie suspected what shall we say to the corruption of this prologue to the booke of Iudith wherein Hagiographa is put for Apocrypha as may bee prooved by Lyranus c Lyrs Prolog in Bibl. Neque al quemm veat quod in Iudith Thobiae prologis dicitur quod apud Hebraeos inter Hâgiographa leguntur qui manifestus error est apocripha non hagiographa est legendum qui error in omnibus quos viderim codicibus invenitur inolâuit
ãâã Romana Athanasius ãâã ãâã ãâã hist cap. ãâ¦ã S. ãâã Basil Augustine stile thâse writings ââving his counterfeit Calixius at Rome make these bookes Canonicall it being plaine that they were so tearmed in respect of other corrupt writings which were read in the Church at that time which practice was excepted against by the Third Councell of Carthage ãâã as it is urged by the Iesuite wherein it was decreed that nothing should be read in the Church under the name of divine Scriptures and I thinke you will not conceive this inhibition had any relation to any of those bookes we call Apocryphall they being never condemned to be read by the Church Besides Bellarmine telleth us the title of divine ââ given by most ãâã and most ãâã ãâã to the Prayer of ãâã the 3 and 4. of ãâã the 3. and 4. of ãâã and the booke of Pastor â c. And the calling of ãâã Propheticall Scripture by S. Ambrose is to like effect it being given to the fourth booke of Eââras which the Iesuite will not have Canonical Scripture though it be lifted up with as great a testimony from that Faâher q Sixtus seneâ Bibl. sancta lib. 1. de Esdââ lib. 3. 4. Divus Ambrosius etiam quartum librum putat editum ab ipso Esdra non sine divinâ revelatione as the booke of Tobie which hee is willing to justifie But leaving Tobie with his dog the Iesuite hath some further proofe for the Macehabees They are alledged saith he as other Canonicall bookes of Scriptures are without any difference And who are the alledgers Cyprian ãâã âen and Ambrose r Reply pag. ââ Two things are here to be examined First whether every booke cited by a Father be Canonicall Secondly how and in what manner they be urged and cited by the Fathers First it is evident that there is no ground that the citing of a booke by a Father should turne his nature when an Apostles pen hath not that virtue in it selfe unlesse he will conclude all those Poets cited in the Scriptures and the booke of Eââch by Iude to be reckoned within the Canon Besides if this Argument have any life in it against us why ãâã it not have the same strength against Papists to prove the booke called Pastor to be Canonicall which as Bellarmine observeth ãâã by the Fathers Irenaeus who giveth it the name of Scriptures Clemens Alexandrinus and Origen For the Bellarm de scriptor ecclesâ Hermen five Hermes librum scripsit apud veteres valde celebrem ãâã inscripsit Pastorem Is libââ quamvis à sancto ãâã reââo lib. 4 caprino Origeââ et divinorum title Divine given by Cyprian and his testimony out of Augustine there needeth no further illustration ãâã ãâã answered in substance before Our Iesuite from these grounds the principall whereof iâ S. Hieromes ignorance beginnes his ãâã What wonder then if the Church at Rome ãâã ãâã ãâã them also for Canonicall ãâ¦ã The slightest cause hath two or three witnesses those without exception that directly agree one with an other in giving testimony to the proposed articles The Iesuiâe that pretended the auncient Church hath not given us âââ compleat proofe from the same and those which he ââth produced are but particular men with one Provinâââll Councell which they themselves generally approve âoâ and some of his private testimonies say little to the pârpose So all that our Iesuite can expect is this that in some private judgements these bookes might be judged Canonicall but never so delivered by the auncient Church which defence the booke Pastâr hath from ãâã confession and the fourth of Esdras by the confession of your owne Sixtuâ Senensis ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã lib. 1. de ãâã ãâã â ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã And therefoâe there is reason sufficient that our Iesuite should ãâã doâââ his ãâã whichupon so vaine a confidence heâ hath ârected and acknowledge their change although they have doââ it upon so good a ground as the imbracing of some private judgments three or foure hââdreth yââes after Christ leaving the streame of the ancient Church âhe ãâã ãâã of the same Thus the charge appââââth to be ãâã not ãâã as the Iesuit hoped to have proved it that the Church of Rome hath leââ the gââârall practise of the âââcient Church and hath imbracââ ãâã private ãâã not for love of their persons but ãâã in the ãâã themselves they finde some shelter ãâã their ãâã ãâã ãâã sââing he cannot declare them scriptures by ãâã ãâã ãâã neither by the testimony of the ancient ãâã ãâã ãâã all is sure if we cannot manifest that ãâã bookes held now ãâã by the Church of ãâã ãâã a contrary sentence by the ââcient church ãâã ãâã ãâã all his skill ãâã ãâã ââ ãâã saith the ãâã ââ ãâã thââ evââ the Church of God did ãâ¦ã ãâ¦ã before the Church declared them for Canonicall by ãâã authoritie * Reply pag 2â The Iesuit must tell us what he meâââth by the Churches declaring them by publicke authority For if he understand a generall Councell it is idle for they never came to be so yâ Canus loc Theol. l. â c. ââ Cyprianus ãâã ãâã in expositione symboli âosdem sex libros patrum anctoritate a quibus se ãâã ãâã a ãâã ãâã ãâã Quod idââ ãâã ciâ ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ââordium Cuââque diligeâter de omnibus exploraverat omni investigatione comperit hos libâââ esse a veteris instrumenti am in Psalmum âââ Sed i ãâã ãâã ãâã Cyril ãâã ââ ãâã Caâ ââ audacious in the primitive times as to claime the priviledge to ââeepe into the Canon Besides he is as foâd in the consequent that they have made no change herein froÌ the practise of the ãâã Church unlesse we can shewe that the ancient Church of God did give judgment or sentenââ contrary to their Trent declaration in a generall councell For if this were good reason the councell of ãâã ãâã have ãâã the 3. 4. booke of Esdras Pastor their decretall epistles Gregory Siâtus yea what not plead in the same manner that they had made no change they never being in your judgment I think condemned by the publicke authoritie of any generall councell in the ancient catholicke Church that did give judgment or sentence conââry thereunto But if the Church might be said to give âââ judgment against the bookes of Iudith Toby and the ãâã by keeping them out of the canoâ as no doubt ââ may practise being the best declareâ of mens judgements it shal be manifested sufficieÌtly that they have long ãâã received their doome For first they were alwaies difââââmed in regard of the canon rule of faith ãâã that the Iesuit hath not produced one privat ãâã that is plaine and convincing for almost âââ yeares ãâã Christ Secondly In the ãâã Catalogue
ãâã by ãâã âall of the aââcient Fathers and the Councell of ãâã Canone ãâ¦ã these bookes are omitted ââââ part of the ãâã Scripture Thirdly the reputed 47. Canon of the third Councell of Carthage which is their cheifest testimony by the indgemeÌt of their own was never determinââââ that Synode âarclaij Paraenesis l. 1. c. â1 Refertur âic canoâ concil 3. Carthaginensi cui Augustinus interââit sed ex ãâã constat posterioris Concilij esse quod paulo post sub Boni ââcio convocaââm Fourthly in after ages they were by many rejected a never getting authority till the Trent decree Besides these bookes will by their owne light declare of what authority they are The ãâã I hope will grant that God is as true in his word as the Pope infallible in his decrees if upon this ground these bookes deserve credit let the Reader conclude first for Iudeth whether it were âsquam or ullâbi we cannot tell neither I thinke the Iesuite himselfe Again she honoureth that fact of Siââon * Caââs loco ââpra citat Constat auâem ãâã ãâã doctisâimoâ in contrariam sententiam ãâã qui tamen semper in Ecclesia Catholica sunt habiti Nich. Lyâan super ãâã â 1. super Tobiââ Abuleâââs super Math. c. 1. D. Aââon 3. p. â 1â ãâã ãâã ãâã loââ tum maâime in fine ãâã super ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã etiam sex ââcros esse ãâã Gelaââââ Pâpa rejecit ãâã ãâã Macha Diâââ autem Gregorius l. moral ââ rejjoââ ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã de Tâââporibus Rich l. 2. Exceptioâââ c. 9. Ocham ââ Diââ ãâã 1. l. 3. ãâã Ac D. Aug docet aâ Ecclesia esse quid em receptos seââââ certa side ãâã 9. 2 and Levy which the Spirit of God abhorreth as appeares by Moses â Gen. 49. 5. And we may see that Iudeth fitting her selfe for lyes and deceit * ãâã 9. 10 desireth God to give a blessing thereunto â Ver. 13. which action as it condemneth the person that doth the same so doth it disgrace this booke which speaketh ââ directly opposite to the Apostolicall rule * Eph. 4. 25. And as Iudeth doth detect her selfe so doth Tâbit also by his vaine story of the Rivall Devill â Tob 6. 14. the driving away of a devill or an evill spirit which should trouble any with the smoke of the heart and the liver of a fish * Tââ 6. 7 contrary to Christs doctrine that there are some devills which will not be cast out but by fasting and prayer â Mat. 17. 21. And wherefore should the Apostle Eph 6. 13. have left this out of his aâmoury if it had bene of such forââ eââicacy as is here expressed Further we have an Angell lyeing chap. 5. verse ââ and a fish travailing on Land chap. 6. verse 2. The Maâchabees containe many things which declaââ the author of them not to write with confidence of Godâ Spirit asisting him as first that he was an Epitoââist of ââson * 2. Maccà b 2. 23. Secondly he excuseth himselfe â 2 Maccab. â5 39. as if the holy Ghost might deserve a censure Thirdly it appeareth that his end is to delight his Reader * 2. Maccab. 2 25. 15. 40. and to get honour to himselfe â 2. Maccab. 2 â6 â7 Lastly he justifieth Razis in killing himself * 2. Macâab 14 41. 42. 43. a commendation fitter for the ãâã ãâã then the patient Marâârs of Christ as S. Augustine Aug. cân Gâud l. c 31. Dictum est quod ãâã nobiliter merit meâus veller hâmiliter âââ enim ãâã Illiâautem verbis historia gentium âââdare ãâã sed viros ãâã huius ââculi non martyrââ Christi observeth To these many more may be added but this which hath bene spokeÌ will suffice to shew that they have dealt without all conscience in obtruding those bookes upon the church which were never as canonicall received from the Iewes unto whom were committed the oracles of God * Rom. 3. 2. never delivered to the primitive Church from the Apostles never aproved by any father of the church for almost 400 yeares never thought of when the Canon was repeated such which by their Physiognomy detect themselves Whence we may gather that the Church of Rome now hath varied in her judgment from the church of God then althogh we be not able to lay down the precise time when she thought her selfe wiser then her forefathers heerein Neither will his turning to the Epistles of Iames Iude the second of Peter c Reply pag. 2â c any thing availe his cause in regard there is a great difference betwixt those Epistles these bookes of Iudeth Tâbit and the Macchabees for although some private men did doubt of the former yet the church in generall did receive and approve the fame * See before pag. â5 whereas on the contrary the Iesuite after all his search cannot finde âââ testimony either of Father or Councell that accounâââ the latter Canonicall for well-nigh 400 yeares after Christ And therefore most indiscreetly did the Iesuit vrge ãâã and ãâã to prove the like doubt to have bene held of these Epistles with those bookes which they absolutely call Apocrypha Secondly he abuseth his Reader when he would perswade that they were ouely particular Fathers that doubted of these bookes when the Iesuite cannot finde that they were received either of the Iewes or the Apostles or Primitive Fathers for certaine ages after Christ Thirdly to what thoughts of desperation is he and his fellowes driven to defend this adding to the Canon as first that doubtfull writings which have beene accompted Apocryphall for certaine hundred of yeares which our Iesuite calleth somtime may by the publick authority of the Church be declared Canonicall and secondly that particular Fathers which indeed are all the Fathers that lived in the first 300. almost 400. yeares the Iesuite citing none within that compasse but Cyprian and their bastard Calixtuâ as hath beene formerly declared might doubt of the authority of those bookes without prejudice till the Church had declared them for Canonicall by publicke authority But if the Canon was not compleate in the first times I would know when it was made perfect and whether in those times tradition was enabled to declare the same or whether the Fathers were negligent to testifie this truth and also whether Canonicall and Apocryphall is a distinction lately invented All this the Iesuite must resolve or else acknowledge the Canon of the Church in the Primitive times to be certainely knowne and setled which will declare their vanity and change in these last times to adde unto the sacred Canon and rule of Faith upon pretence that the Church hath power to declare canonicall Scripture A Doctrine invented in after-ages by the Roman faction who as they looked for unlimited power so to defend their practises they desire an unrestrayned rule making Scriptures what
they list interpreting it according to the times how they pleasâ d Epistola 2. Nich. de Cusa Card. de usu commu ad Boâemoâ Ecclesia hodierna non ita ambulat in ritu communionis sicut ante ista tempora quando sanctissimi viri utriusque speciâi Sacramentum necessarium esse vi praecepti Christi et verbo opere aâââuebant Poââââ ne tunc Ecclesia ârrare Certè non Quod si non quomodo id ââdiè verum non est quod tunc omnium opinione affirâabatur cùm non sit alia Ecclesia ista quam ãâã Ceâââ hoc te non movent quod diversis temporibus alius alius ritus sacrisiciorum at etiam ãâã stante veritate invenitur scripturasque esse ad tempus ãâã et vaâââ intellectas ita ââuno tempore secundùm currentem universalem ãâã ââpoâârentur mutato ãâã iterum sententia mutaretur SECT V. How vainely our Answerer betaketh himselfe to the Scriptures againe IN all this Section we finde nothing but what the most learned Answerer before stiled a sleight a In his Answer to the Iesuites Challenge pag 11. for where will he manifest the most reverend Lord scared with the auncient Church whose testimonies he is assured afflict these worst and last times but that he might first give the sacred Scriptures the precedencie which is due to the word of God and that he might not erect a new faith which was never builded upon the foundatton of the Apostles and Prophest b Ibid. Now let us see to what purpose the Iesuite hath heere spent his paines He it should seem was willing to finde out a way whereby the true Religion might be knowne and first hee taketh it for graunted that the Primitive Church of Rome held the true Religion for the first 500. yeares Secondly that this true Church of Rome did generally hold the chiefe Articles of Religion pointed out by himselfe in his demaund and then would have men to judge of true points of Religion by the testimony of that Church c See the ââââites Reply pag. 29. The most learned Answerer in this place saith nothing to these things in particular but to the Iesuites whole frame which he maketh a rule to finde out true Religion by arguing it first as a needlesse labour secondly as a tedious rule in regard matters in controversie might be brought to a shorter tryall thirdly as derogating from the Word of God that Rocke upon which alone wee build our faith from which no sleight that they can devise saith he shall ever draw us d See the ãâã reverend Lord Primaââ his Answer pag. 11 Vpon this the Iesuite hath almost spent a whole page to prove that the sayings and authorities of those auncient Fathers are sufficient to prove what their opinion was e Reply pag. 29. in the points controverted as if the most learned Answerer had denyed that which in the very place alledged by the Iesuite he undertaketh to make good viz r that the Fathers writings fortifie the Catholicke cause against the Pope his party And this we say saith the most learned Answerer not as if we feared that these men were able to produce better proofes out of the writings of the Fathers for the part of the Pope then we can doe for the Catholicke cause when we come to joyne in the particulars they shall find it far otherwise f In his Answer to the Iesuites Challenge â Gregor de Valen. Analys Fidei l. 8. c. 8. Fatendum est raro accidere posse ut quae sit Doctorum omnium uno tempore viventium de religione sententia satis cognoscâtur Sunt enim Catholici Doctores in Ecclesia ubique diffusa plurimi qui proinde omnes nec facile congregari nec interrogari possunt quid senâiânt Whereby it is cleare that the Iesuite hath altogether fought with his owne shadow or the Iesuite Valentiag having not assaulted either word or passage of the most learned Answerers For if this most reverend Lord had accepted the rule I doubt not but he would have acknowledged the Fathers able to relate their owne beliefe and would further have accepted them as sole Umpier but accompting this but a Iesuiticall shift to avoide the true touchstone or ground of faith the holy Scripture he tells him that alledge what authority you list without Scripture and it cannot suffice which the Iesuite did observe although he is unwilling to take notice of it in regard hee supposeth that the Answerer will not be satisfied herewith h Reply pag. 29 This dispute sheweth that the Iesuite hath not beene so well imployed as the Emperour for in all this his fishing ne musca quidem he hath not caught a Fly and therefore the good man is sleepie that thinketh the Answerer hath for got himselfe for although he should graunt the first that the primitive Church of Rome held the true Religion of Christ for the first 500. yeares it will not needes follow that whatsoever points the Fathers of that Church generally held without the Scriptures should be points of true Religion For then every point of Morality Philosophy Rhetorick ãâã should be points of true Religion and this is crossed in the Greeke Church which is a true one but yet notwithstanding may not bee justified in every particular that they generally handle Neither dare the Iesuite admit the consequent for then the points of the blessed Virgins conception in originall some k Canus âoâ Theol. l. 7. c. 1 n. 1. n. 3. receiving of the Sacrament by children l Rejoynder pag. 25. and the opinion of the Millenaries m Sixtus Senens Bibl. sancta l. 5. c. 233. of the vulgar reading of the Scriptures n Rejoynder p. 139. 14â 145. communion in both kindes o Rejoynder pag. 116. that the bookes of Toây Iudith and the Macchabees are Apocryphall p Rejoynder pag. 166. must be points of true Religion Nay further the Iesuite urgeth that the most learned Answerer elsewhere confesseth that those which dye in the communion of the Church of Rome at this day dye under the mercy of God q Reply pag. 5 which surely this most reverend Lord would not have granted to them if he had not beene perswaded that they beleived aright in the foundation of faith and yet he doth not take any Church since the Apostles times to have beene more corrupt or full of errour then your owne So that a particular Church as the Roman may in some of her members be true in the foundation of faith and yet tainted with many corruptions both of manners and doctrine Is not this plaine by many of S. Paul his Epistles by the Church of Pergaââs * Revel â â4 And therefore the Iesuite may consider how weake a rule hee would perswade us to follow as if this argument were concludent because we hold a particular Church a true Church therefore that Church
Head for that Church obtained this title by reason of the Cittie wherein the principall members of the Church remained and because it was an Apostolicall Church not for that all the other Apostolicall Churches were subordinate unto it in power The second hee urgeth is out of the Eight Epistle of his fourth booke where hee would have Cyprian to stile the Roman Church the roote and the mother of the Cathelicke Church x Reply pag 50 If this be true surely Cyprian had a conceipt that the branch might grow before the roote for who will say that Rome first received the Faith or the name of Christians or that there was no Catholicke Church before Peter preached there But Cyprian meant no such thing as this Iesuite would perswade him to affirme Hee findes a Schisme in Rome betwixt Novatianus and Cornelius Nevatianus being made Bishop the other living suspends his judgment in this matter untill hee had enquired the truth from the Romane Preists and Deacons y Cyprian Epistol 45. Omnia interim integra suspenderentur done end nos iidem collegae nostri rebus illic aut ad pacem aut pro veritate compertis redirent onely hee adviseth them that like good Navigators they should not separate themselves from the unity of the Catholicke Church z Ibid. Nos enim singulis navigantibus ne cum scandalo ullo navigarent rationem red sentes scimus nos hortatos cos esse ut Ecclesiae Catholiââ radicem matricem pag ãâã at ãâã which he understandeth by this phrase taking the roote and mother of the Catholicke Church to bee the âânitie of Faith and not as our Iesuââ would collect that thereby is meant the Roman Congregation for wherefore then should he suspend his judgment till he heard the matter if his thoughts had concluded as this Iesuite would have it that Cornelius and his Adherents were the roote and mother of the Catholicke Church And that this is the meaning of S. Cyprian we may easily perceive in regard he taketh these wordes ad Catholicâ Ecclesiae unitatem to the unity of the Catholicke Church and ad radicis matris sinum to the bosome of their roote and mother in his 42 Epistle to expresse the same thing Besides wee may further observe that the roote and mother of the Catholicke Church is not Cornelius and his Diocess in regard the Iesuite will not have the Pope and his Diocese to be the Catholicke Church a Reply pag. 49. which S. Cyprian Epist 43. makes to bee the Mother ad matrem suam id est Ecclesiam catholicam His third witnesse from Antiquity is Tertullian who even when hee was fallen otherwise ânto heresi yet did he though he was an Hereticke acknowledge the Bishop of Rome to be Episcopus Episcoperum the Bishop of Bishops b Reply pag. 51. As if this were sufficient to make the Romane Church the head of all other Churches or the Pope the Father of all Bishops Well if it be not Rome hath lost one of her best Arguments for her triumphant Station over the Church of GOD. And who knoweth not that this title was given to all those that had Bishops under them as all Patriarches and Metropolitans had And what is more common then to give other Bishops the stile of Summus vel princeps Episcoporum Cheife or Prince of Bishops as Rabanus speakes of the Bishops of Antioch and Alexandria c Rabanus l. 1. de instit Cleric c. 5. Sicut Archiepiscopus Antiochenus Episcopus atque Alexandrinus Antistes ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã Graeco âocabulo dicitur quod sit summus vel Princeps Episcoporum tenet enim vicem Apostolicam praesidet Episcopis caeteris Yea so common was this appellation that in the third Carthaginian Councell this title was inhibited to all the Metropolitans d Concilium Carthag 3. can 26. Vt primâ sedis Episcopus non appeiletur princeps Sacerdotum aut summus sacerdos aut aliquid hujusmodi sed tantum primae sedis Episcopus But least the Iesuite should say that the stile of Prince of Bishops is not so concludent for an universall government as to be called Bishop of Bishops we shall finde Sidonius calling Lupus Pater Patrum Episcopus Episcoporum Father of Fathers and Bishop of Bishops Sidonius l. 6. Epist 1. Benedictus Spiritus sanctus Pater Dei omnipotentis quod tu Pater Patrum Episcopus Episcoporum and Athanasius was called ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã Arch-Preist of Preists f ãâã in orat ââ de laudibus He ronis which is the same in effect whereby we may see upon how slender a foundation the Castle of S. Angelo is raised Yet if Tertullian be but observed by an eye that will not be blinde it will appeare that he speaketh onely in scorne and ironically when he cals your Roman Bishop cheife preist and Bishop of bishops Onely this Roman Fisher will forsake nothing that commeth to his hooke though it be but the scorne of an Hereticke He ceaseth not but brings in old Irenaeus lib. 3. cap. 3. saying that with this Roman Church by reason of her more powerfull Principality or Supremacy it is necessary that all other Churches doe agree g Reply pag. 51. All this maketh little to give the Church of Rome the headship pretended For the question here is particular concerning the Canon of the Scriptures and the Church of Rome is commended for her truth as she then stood h Irenaeus l. â c. 3. In qua semper ab his qui sunt undique consecratâ est quae ab Apostolis traditio not for her infaâlibilitie in ages after that she should remaine the same For were see Augustine forsakes the Roman Church in which some doubted of the Epistles to the Hebrewes and adhered unto the Greekes who received it into the Canoni Irenaeus also in another matter forall the powerfull principalitie that he gave unto the Roman Church reproved sharpely her Monarch and forsooke not in all probabilitie their Commuâion whom hee had excommunicated k Eusebius hist Eccles l. 5. c. 23. Extant autem verba illorââ qui Victorem acriter reprehenderunt equibus Irenae us Besides if all other Churches did agree with the Roman i Augustin l. â de Peceat merit remissse 27. Ad Haebraeââ quoque Epistola quan quam nonnullis incerta fit tamen magis me movet authoritas Ecclesiarum Orientalium quae hanc etiam in Canonicis habent propter potentiorem principalitatem by reason her more powerfull principalitie it were good our Iesuite would have interpreted what he had meant thereby for these are words that better fit an imperiall government then the rule of the Church And that people should come thither for this respect I thinke the Church of Rome hath little cause to triumph therein any more then other Patriarchall Seas because all men come up from all parts to the Metropoliticall
ut puâo ex piâtate devotione exscribentium qui devotissimas historias horrebant annumerare inter apocrypha and Iohannes Driedo f Dried l. 1. c. 4. Alterum difficultatis nodum qui est super libris Iudith Tobiae conatur dissolvere magister in historijs cuius sententiam seâuitur alius quidam expositor in prooemio Bibliae dicens in prologis illis duobus Hieronymi super Iudith Tobiam mendosum esse codicem in âoloco ubi legimus hagiographa legendâm esse apâcrypha Here is a solide truth for Iudith's virginitie no witnesse but an heare-say and we know not from whom So that our Iesuite ought to seeke an other answere for this is lame halting and of little strength But suppose the Nicene Councell in S. Hieromes opinion did receive Iudith into the Canon yet he will not say the same of Toby and the Maccabees how can our Adversaries then deny the change Why Gods owne are not so much bound to our compassionate Iesuite as these suspicious birthes but how will he array them with a canonicall coate The auncient Church saith he received them for canonicall g Reply pag. 28 S. Hierome his ignorance were then much to be wondred at but this testimony will not be rejected if the Iesuite can make good what so generally he affirmes By the auncient Church hee must exclude neither age nor iudgment unlesse some straglers wherefore then doth hee leave out the first 300. and almost 400. yeares affording us not one testimony but a pretence or two out of Cyprian to no purpose and in his proofes why doth hee afford us onely particular testimonyes private men when the Churches declaration is to be expected at his hands But let us examine his testimonies First he produceth the third councell of Carthage Can. 47. We say this is but a private testimony and at best but a declaration of a particular Church and a Councell that they allowe not themselves h Bellarm. de Rom. Pont. l. 2. cap. 21. At objicit Calvinus Concilium Carthaginense tertium can 26. ubi vetatur ne quis princeps sacerdotum aut summus sacerdos dicatur sed solùm primae sedis Episcopus Respondeo Concilium statuisse solum de Episcopis Africae inter quos multi erant Primates a quales ne vllus corum summus Sacerdos aut Princeps aliorum diceretur Nec enim Concilium hoc provinciale Romanum Ponuficem aut aliarum provinciarum Episcopos obligare poterat Secondly Innocent ad Exuperium But if this be his Epistle what doth he declare therein but his private judgment what finde we there but an answer that he gave not ex cathedrâ but as he expresseth himselfe pro captu intelligentiae meae at the intreatie of a Brother Gelasius his decree hath not one word of Canonicall in it onely they are stiled of the old testament which is a phrase used many times by our selves because they are comprehended in one volume together and yet we esteeme them not within the Canon S. Augustine doth not take canonicall for those scriptures which were inspired by the Spirit of God and delivered by the Catholick Church for such as ãâã appeare by his words before the ãâã of those bookes i Aug. de ãâã Christi l. 2. c. ââ In canonicis ãâã scripturis ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã quas ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã Apostolicas ãâã For first he perswades those to be cheifly respected quae Apostolicas sides habere epistolas ãâã ãâã that were received of those Churches in which the Apostles themselves did âââ and ãâã they directed their Epistles Secondly amongst thâse which he ãâã Canonicall bookes he could have this ãâã Ibid ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã In scripturis ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã to be observed ut âas quae ab omnibus ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã quas ãâã non ãâã that those which are received of all Churches should be ãâã before those which ãâã Churches did not receive Certainely by this we may see what St Augustine ãâã by his Canon not those which were generally received onely but those also which were ãâã of a few Churches and those ãâã ãâã of lesse ãâã Ibid. which were the same that wee accompt ãâã So that Canonicall in Augustines sence is ãâã those which abound with lyes and ãâã Ibid. ãâã ãâã occupenâ ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã denââs ãâã dicent ãâã contra ãâã ãâã ââ is ãâã by his words not to those which is godly bookes were premitted to be read by the people though because not divinely inspired they were not to confirme any point of Doctrine whereby the same Father interpreteth the meaning of that Councel of Carthage urged by the Iesuit in case he had subscribed therunto as our adversaries perswade And that this agreeth with S. Augustine mind it shineth forth in many places For although S. Augustin saith that the Church had them the Maccabees for canonical yet he tels you how not because they were divinely revealed but for the ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã which must needes interpret that the church ãâã them for canonical that is of that canon which was fit to be read only for the moving of the peoples affection by declaring the passions of the ãâã for he maketh them not of that ãâã which were ãâã inspired â Aug. de ãâã Dei ãâã ãâã ãâã opposeth theÌ to it â non ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã in ãâã ãâã ââ quibus ãâã Machobâârum â Aug. con Epist Gâudââ l. ââ 31. ââââpe quidem scripturam quae appellatut Mac ãâã non habent ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã psalmes quibus Dom. ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã testibus tuis Sed recepta est ãâã Ecclesia non ãâã si sobriè legatur vel audiatur libri ãâã non Iudas sed ãâã canonicis ãâã propter ãâã ãâã passiones ãâã ãâã âârabiles This is found saith that Father not in the holy Scriptures which are called Canonicall but in others amongst which are also the bookes of the Macchabeas which not the Iâwes but the Church hath for Canonicall for the vehement and wonderfull sufferings of ãâã Martyrs And so in an other place âââaith that the Scriptures of the ãâã were not received of the Iewes as the Law the Prophets and Psalmes to which God gave testimony ââ to his owne witnesses Yet he denyeth not but the Church received them not unprofitably But wherein lay their profit S. Augustine declareth sâ ãâã in the sober reading and hearing of them read For Isiodorus Cassâdorus their testimonies make noâ the received Doctrine of the auncient Church Neither can those tearmes of holy and divine wherewith â Bellarm. de Verbo Dei lib. l. ãâã 4 Po ãâã de ijs ãâã ãâã â ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã vino ãâã ãâã ãâã c ãâã ãâã illo ãâã ãâã ãâã quae ãâã ab ãâã epist 3. ad ââper ãâã ãâã 15. âââ
produced did neither publish the worke nor promised as he faith to publish it sincerely in its owne colours And now he thinkes that he hath said sufficient to excuse the Censurers of Doway or any other that should endeavour to cleanse away such errours as have beene by the enemies of truth foisted either into that or into any other the like worke r. Reply pag. 4â But the Censurers of Doway did not thinke these to bee such Errors as have beene foisted into that worke by the enemies of the truth Those errors which they endeavour to cleanse away are such as are found in the true olde Catholicke Writers Å¿ Iâd Expurg âelg pag. 5. Quùm igitur in Catholicis veteribus alijs c. Nay how could it bee that Heretickes as these Antichristianaries call us should cry out that you burne and forbid such antiquity as maketh for you if Bertrams booke at the publishing thereof had beene beââabered by O Ecolampadius and they onely had cleansed it of these things The Iesuite must then confesse unlesse he haue better to pleade for himselfe then hee hath produced that neither Fathers nor Antiquity shall controule him or his whilst by extenuation excuse inventing devices denying or faigning they can avoyde the same But all his hope is though this be graunted that hee will stop our mouthes by recrimination I will take some paines saith he to try whether we may not finde more easily such like corruption and washing of antiquity amongst his fellowes as he would fasten upon us t Reply pag 46 Nescivit iniquus confusionâm * âeph 3. 5 Whilst a wicked man can speake hee will not blush otherwise the Iesuit would not have instaÌced so vainly as he here hath done For first ââo of his instances are nothing to the purpose in regard he cannot produce any Father that either Willet or the Apologists set forth therefore they could not fret wash or corrupt the monuments of the Auncients which they never published Yet Mr Malone cannot be ignorant that privat men in defending their opinions doe many times interpret the Scriptures and Fathers contrary to their Adversaries thoughts against whom they use them so that their Adversaries with passion are many times provoked to take notice of some things which they conceive to bee not clearely carried and thereupon take occasion to challenge them of misalledging corrupting abusing detracting c. This we finde is done amongst our selves as in the Controversies amongst your owne the like is not wanting t Wadding Legat Phil 3. sect 2. orat 9 tract 10. § 6. Quâ velurâ hâc diligentia exhibitâ experiretur vestra Sanctitas tam falsum esse quod dicunt Adversarij quam verum esse quod in citato Tractatâ ego animadverti ex apparenti violenter congesta illâ congerie Patrum apud Bandellum Bandelloque similes reprobatos âliosve authores paucissimos esse vel nullos qui expresse ferant sententiam contra Virginem caeterosque vel fermè omnes corruptos mutilatos esse in verbis quae ex eisdem proferunâur Payva ciâ ibid. Minimè verum est communi veteris Ecclesiae sententiae illam repugnare cum praesertim à multis videam Sanctorum Patrum testimonijs à quibusdam oppugâari quae partiâ sunt depravata partim nihil ad rem faciunt Onely here is the difference that we bewayle these passionat escapes could wish that men were more tempered with Charity You justifie your owne and tell us that your Church graunteth free liberty to all Catholicke Doctors to expound as well the Scriptures as the Fathers for the upholding of that part which themselves doe thinke to bee most probable u Reply Sect. XI For the objection from Mr Rogers true it is that he was deceived in taking that booke for Augustines when in all probability it was written by some Author of a Schoolemans age for Riming Meditations were not in date in St Augustines time as we may gather from Sixtus Senonsis x Sixtus Senen Bibl sanct l 3. Scholastici cûm desideraren thomines sui saeculi rythmes deditos ad studia sacrarum lirerarum allicere acceptâ hinc occasione excogitârunt ipsi novam Metricae artââ rationem For could that practice if it had beene so auncient have beene contemned exploded by all learned men in the late learned ages as inept superstitious ridiculous y Ibid. Non me later Scholaâocorum PoeÌticem ab omnibus ãâã contemni prorfus explodi tanquam ineptam superstitioââm ãâã dignam I perswade my selfe Antiquity would have had a greater reverence and better esteeme Now in regard this Author was diligent in the reading of Augustine of whom he hath made good use in all probabilitie he gave it the name it beares and yet he mixed many corruptions of his owne therewith Secondly suppose the booke be Augustines yet consider that M. Rogers doth not put forth the same to deceive for the Iesuite acknowledgeth that he declares in his Epistle Dedicatory what is omitted in the booke so that what he hath done is no more in effect but a censure such as Sixtus Senensis hath used and others Thirdly the booke that hee published was fot popular use and therefore he thought it not requisite to suffer those things which he distasted should remaine in the text where conveniently he could not advertise the Reader but placed them in the Epistle Dedicatory where he hath shewed what he conceived of them Wherefore this as it is the last so it is the Iesmites worst defence whereby to excuse themselves hee would make Israell to sinne SECT VII HEre the Iesuite considers How vainely our Answerer accepteth of the Fathers judgement againe a Reply pag. 4â and in the first place most unwisely playeth the Orator Notwithstanding all that our Answerer hath said hetherto playing as it were fast and loose and by a doubtfull tergiversation keeping off and on with the Fathers at last ashamed of his inconstancie herein he proclaimeth valoroustio his finall resolution in these words That you may see how confident we are in the goodnes of our cause we will not now stand upon our right nor refuse to enter with you into this field but give you leave for this time both to be Challenger and the appointer of your owne weapons b Reply pag. 4â If the Iesuite had any modestie he would not play the childe so vainely as here he doth for where doth the most reverend the Lord Primate play fast and loose Out of which of his words will he finde his doubtfull tergiversation where is his inconstancy that maketh him ashamed These flashes at the best are but straynes of Vanity The most learned Answerer hath shewed the Iesuite out of Tertullian the meanes to finde out the truth Their very doctrine it selfe being compared with the Apostolicke by the diversitie and contrarietie thereof saith that auncient Father will pronounce that it had for