any impugned part or branch of their Religion From which vndaunted resolution of theirs we certainely collect that this their constant determination of defending the least point of their Religion proceedeth partly from a generall instinct of God impressed in mans soule teaching ech man that death it selfe is rather to be suffered then we are to deny any part of fayth and Religion in generall And thus according hereto we find that the Athenians who were Heathens though they did erre touching the particular Obiect therin as worshipping false Gods were most cautelous that no one point should be infringed or violated touching the worshipping of their Gods The like religious seuerity was practised by the Iewes as Iosephus (s) Ioseph contra Apion witnesseth Now from these Premisses we deduce against our Adiaphorists or Neutralls in Religion either Catholike or Protestant that no points of true Religion are of that cold Indifferency as that they are not to be much regarded either in beliefe or in profession but that they are of that Nature worth and dignity as a man is obliged to vndergoe all torments yea death it selfe before he yeald or suffer the least relaps in denying any of the said verities or in any externall Profession contrary thereto Animaduersion CXXI FOr the further impugning of the indifferency of seuerall Religions and to shew that euery religion among Christians is not capable of Saluation I will drawe one demonstration out of Scripture The text is this In the (t) 1. Timoth cap. 4. larer tymes certaine shall depart from the fayth attending to spirits of Errour and Doctrine of Deuils forbidding to Marry to abstaine from Meates Heere the Apostle prophesyeth according to the iudgement of S. Chrysestome (u) Hom. 12. in Timoth Ambrose (x) In hunc locum Ierome (y) L. contra Iouinian c. 7. and (z) Haer. 25. 40. Austin of the Heretykes Encratites Marcionists Ebionites and such like who denyed Matrimony as a thing altogether vnlawfull and prohibited absolutely at all tymes and the eating of certaine Meates as Creatures impure Now these Heretykes belieued in the Trinity the Incarnation and other Supreme poynts of Christian Religion And yet eueÌ„ for these two former Heresyes touching Marriage and eating of Meates and not for their misbeleife in the Trinity Incarnation c. they are said by the Apostle to depart from the fayth of Christ and to attend to the Doctrine of Deuils But such as leaue the fayth of Christ and attend to the doctrine of the Diuels are not in state of Saluation Now these Errours heere mentioned by the Apostle are of as little or lesser consequence then the Controuersyes betweene the Catholiks the ProtestaÌ„ts therefore it standeth vpon ech Christian if so he expect to saue his soule to professe entirely and wholy the true Religion Animaduersion CXXII TOuching the Doctrine of Transubstantiation in the B. Sacrament of the Eucharist the auncient Fathers are most full therin euen by the acknoledgement of the ProtestaÌ„ts themselues First then Gregory the great is coÌ„fessed by D. Humfrey (a) In Iesuitism part 2. rat 5. to haue broght in Transubstantiation into England at his first planting of Christianity in this Country as is aboue shewed Chrysostome is reprehended by the Centurists to vse their owne words (b) Cent. 5. col 517. Quia parum commodè de Transubstantiatione dixit (c) Cent. 4. c. 4. col 295. S. Ambrose is affirmed by the Centurists in the booke ascribed to Ambrose to confirme the Doctrine of Transubstantiation which Father for the said Doctrine is also taxed by (d) L Ep. Oecolampad Swinglij l. 3. Oecolampadius S. Cyrill is reprehended by Peter (e) Ep. ad Bezam annexed to his Common places Martyr in these words I will not easely subscribe to Cyrill who affirmed such a Communion as thereby euen the flesh and bloud of Christ is ioyned to the Blessings for so he calleth the holy bread c. S. Cyprian is charged in the booke ascribed to Vrsinus the Protestant entituled Coâ—monefactio cuiusdam Theologi de sancta Caenâ— who there thus writeth (f) Pag. 111. â—18 In Cyprian are many things which seeme to affirme Transubstantiation Lastly Ignatius is acknoledged by Keâ—pnitius (g) Exa part 1. p. 94. to haue confirmed the Doctrine of Transubstantiation in that eminent place of his (h) Ep. ad Smirnenses Eucharistias oblationes noÌ„ admittuÌ„t quòd non confiteantur eucharistiam esse carnem saluatoris quae pro peccatis nostris passa est c. The truth of the Fathers iudgment touching the Reall presence is so fully confessed by our Aduersaryes as that Antony de Adamo a markable Protestant thus acknoledgeth hereof (i) In his Anatomy of the Masse p. 236. J haue not hitherto beene able to know when this Opinion of the Reall bodily being of Christ in the Eucharist did first beginne With whome conspireth Adamus Francisci another Pro estant saying Commentum (k) In Margarita Theol. pag. 156. Papistarum c. The Papists inuention touching Transubstantiation crept earely into the Church Thuâ— farre of the Protestants Confessions in this poynt whereunto we may add that these Fathers heere aboue charged with the rest of the Fathers of those Ages were the chiefe Pastours Doctours of the Primitiue Church which Church belieued herein according as it was taught by the said Fathers If then these Fathers should erre in the Doctrine of TraÌ„substantiation then should it follow that the primitiue Church yea and the vniuersall Church of Christ contrary â—o Christs (l) Math 1â— promisse therein should erre Animaduersion CXXIII YF we do take into due consideration 〈◊〉 seuerall chiefe heades and points when vnto the sentences and authorities of 〈◊〉 ancient Fathers touching the Eucharist 〈◊〉 be reduced we cannot otherwise be perâ—â—ded but that the Fathers taught vnaâ—â—mously the Doctrine of the Reall Presence and Transubstantiation seing those Heads 〈◊〉 the Fathers sentences are so agreeable aâ—â—fortable to Christs Reall being in the Sacrament and so incompetent and disproportionable to a bare Typicall Presence or being of him therein To begin then The First Head of the Fathers authorityes may be the Appellatâ—â— or Names which the Fathers giue to the Blessed Sacrament far differently from the Sacramentaryes which is an argument that Sacramentaryes differ from the Fathers iâ— beleife therein Thus the Fathers call the Sacrament The body bloud of our Lord Thâ— precious body tremenda Mysteria the fearefuâ—â— Misteries the pledge of our Saluation Our priâ—â— whereas the Sacramentaryes vsuall phraâ—â— is to call the Eucharist the Symboll or signâ— of the body and bloud of the Lord. The second Classe or Head is taken from the Comparison of this Sacrament with other things for they compare it with the Manna Paschall Lamb with Panis Propositionis and the lyke saying The Eucharist doth differ from all these things as the Truth differs froÌ„ â—â—gures the body
concerne Merit of workes as in Luc. 20. and 21. 2. Thess 1. wherein those said words are vsed they translate them To seeme to be worthy or to seeme only to be made worthy therby to weaken such texts for the prouing of Merit of works But in other Texts not touching the Doctrine of Merit they can be content to translate those words truly that is to be worthy and to be worthy indeed as in this Text O how (*) Heb. 20. much sorer punishment shall he be worthy of who treadeth vnderfoote the Sonne of God Thus much for a Tast Animaduersion CLXXIV THe English Protestant Translation of the Bible is not only by the Catholiks ackâ—owledged to be corrupt and impure but â—so by many Protestant themselues M. â—urges thus censureth of that Translation â—ying How (17) M. Burges in his Apology sect 6. shall I approue vnder my haÌ„d 〈◊〉 Translation which hath many omissions many â—dditioÌ„s which sometymes obscureth sometymes peruerteth the sense being sometymes sensles sometymes contrary To whose Iudgment herein subscribe diuers Ministers in their ioint consent thereof in these words A (18) The ministers in their abridgment of a Booke deliuered to king Iames. pag. 11. 12. Translation that taketh away from the Text that addeth to the Text and this sometymes to the changing or obscuring of the meaning of the Holy Ghost And againe A Translation which is absurd and sensles peruerting in many places the meaning of the Holy Ghost All whose Censures herein agree with the like censure of D. Reynolds deliuered in King Iames his presence in Hampton Court who refused to subscribe to the Communion booke because said he it warranted a false corrupt translation of the Bible Now from hence I thus deduce The Protestants by their owne ConfessioÌ„s haue had as yet neuer any true English Translation of the Scriptures Therefore as yet the English Protestants neuer enioyed according to their owne Principles a sufficient and competent Iudge of Controuersies Since admitting the Scripture were the sole Iudge of Controuersyes in fayth yet this of necessity must be vnderstood of the Scripture as it is pure and incorrupt not 〈◊〉 it is impure and abastarded with false Translations From the Scripture I will descend to the English Communion booke or Booke of Common Prayer This Communion booke as it is euen at this present we fynd to be thus condemned by Protestanâ—s Twenty two preachers in London in (19) The Booke is intituled The Petition of twenty two Ministers in London one Petition did thus charge the Common Prayer Booke saying Many things in the Communion Booke are repugnant to the word of God And againe In the Communion Booke there be things of which there is no reasonable sense There is contradiction in it euen in necessary and essentiall points of Religion The holy Scripture is at graced by it A point so euident that D. Couell rebuketh and censureth other Protestants herein saying The (20) D. Couell in his Examen pag. 179. Communion Booke is boldly despised meaning by the Puritans Grosse errours and manifest impietyes meaning in their opinion are in the Communion Booke So he redargueth his owne brethren Now here in like manner as aboue I do thus argue Yf the English Protestants haue had no forme of Common Prayer published to them but such as is repugnant to the Scripture and in which there is contradiction euen in the necessary points of Religion them followeth that euen to this day the ignorant English Protestant neuer prayed to God auayleably For it is Prayer sorting to the word of God and not what is accompanied with errours which is piercing in Gods eaâ—es See here what dangerous Resuâ—tancies proceed to the English Protestants from their own Brethrens Confessions though most true that as yet they enioy not the Scripture as truly translated nor a pâ—ouâ— set forme of Prayer or Communion Booke Animaduersion CLXXV SEeing we who professe the Roman religion are commonly yea often euen by our Aduersaries called Catholikes therfore I will here briefly shew by laying open the Antiquity of that Title how much we are honored by being so styled whereas other false Doctrines commonly take thâ—ir Denomination from the first Authour thereof or from the Doctrine it selfe Well then (21) Cyril Cateâ—his 18. Cyrill thus writeth hereof Si iueris in aliquam vrbem c. Yf thou shalt goe into any Citty thou demaundest not wherâ— is the Church or house of God for euen the Heretikes say they haue the house of God the Church sed petas vbi sit Catholica Ecclesia c. quasi dicas si hoc petas nullus Haereticorum suam Ecclesiam ostendet But thou demaundest where the Catholike Church is for that name is peculiar to this holy Church the mother of vs all as if thou shouldest say if thou demaundest this no Heretike will â—hew to thee his Church Pacianus Christianus (22) In Epist. ad Sympronianum quae est de Nomine Catholico mihi nomen est Catholicus vero cognomen illud me nuncupat istud me ostendit A Christian is my Name a Catholike my surname by the former J am named by this other J am knowne or discerned And againe Catholicum istud nec Marcionem nec Apellem c. This Name Catholike neither doth it sound or meane Marcion or Apelles or Montanus nec haereticos sumit authores neither doth it admit any Hereticall Authours Now on the other syde how Heresies and their Professours take their appellation this one testimony of Chrysostome for greater breuity shall serue Illi habent (23) Chrysost hom 33. in acta Apost ol quosdam à quibus appellantur prout enim Haerefiarchae nomen ita secta vocatur c. Those men meaning Heretikes haue some men from whom they take their Name for as the Name of the Arch-Heretike is so is the sect called Which saying we find verifyed euen at this day by the words Lutheran Swinglian Caluinist c. Now whereas our Aduersaries by way of retortion call vs Papists To this I answere as is aboue in this Treatise touched that this word Papist is not deriued from any knowne Authour or Arch-Heretike as the words Lutheran Swinglian Caluinist c. but from the Pope and such was S. Peter yea Christ himself Add hereto that (24) Homil 33. in Act 4. Chrysostome as if it were by way of foreseeing we should be called Papists sayth Jt is not hurtfull if Catholikes be called by the name of those who gouerne the Church in the name of Christ so that they receaue not their name from any particular man as Heretikes are named Thus S. Chrysostome To conclude it is to be obserued that we are called Papists only by the Lutherans in Germany and Heretikes in some neere Countryes but we are not so called to omit Jtaly and Spayne in Greece Asia Affrike or in the Jndyes Animaduersion CLXXVI THough the many Controuersyes agitated betweene
which we Catholikes call the Sacrament of Extreme Vnction But to proceede further in this point touching the Booke of Common Prayer in those dayes I will alledge the words of M. Done an eminent Protestant who thus writeth hereof Concerning (38) M. Doue in hit persuasion to English Recusants pag. 31. the Booke of Common prayer when the Masse was first put downe K. Henry had his English Liturgy and that was iudged absolute and without exception But when King Edward came to the Crowne that was condemned and another in the place was made which Peter Martyr and Bucer did approue as very consonant to Gods word When Queene Elizabeth began to reigne the former was iudged to be full of imperfections and a new deuised and allowed by consent of the Clergy But about the middle of her reigne we grew weary of that Booke and great meanes hath beene made to abandon that and establish another Which though it was not obtayned yet do we at the least at euery change of Prince change our Booke of CoÌ„mon prayer We be so wanton that we know not what we would haue Thus this ProtestaÌ„t Now from hence I conclude First that Protestancy here in England is not so ancient as from king Edwards dayes Secondly that it was not at perfection in the middle of Queen Elizabeths reigne For if it had then beene perfect and complete there had beene no neede of a new Common Prayer-Booke For at euery change of the Common booke of prayer there was a change of points of fayth according to which points the former CoÌ„munion Booke was to be reformed corrected And therfore according to the iudgment of men of those tymes it is thus said by M. Parker The day-starre (39) M. Parker against Symbolizing part 2. cap. 5. pag. 4. was not risen so high in their dayes when yet Queene Elizabeth reformed the defects of King Edwards Communion Booke c. Yet so altered (40) Ibidem pag. 37. as that when it was proposed to be confirmed by the Parliament it was refused Animaduersion CLXXVIII THe Doctrine of Recusancy is taught both by Protestants and Catholikes Since both of them hould it a most wicked thing and not to be donne but vnder payne of damnation without finall repentance that a man should communicate only in going to the Church and to heare but a sermon contrary to that Religion which himselfe belieueth to be true For though this Act may seeme to be couered vnder pretence of obseruing the Princes commandement for feare of losing our temporall estates yet in very deed this Act of going to the Church virtually and potentially includeth a conformity in all points to the religion of that Church to the which a Man goeth and so â—t comes to be a dissimulation or rather an absolute Abnegation of that Religion which a man houlds in his soule to be the only true Religion Now that the Protestants do teach the Doctrine of Recusancy I meane not to be present at the sermons or Prayers of a different Religion I proue from (41) Caluin de vitandis superstitionibus extat in tract Theolog. pag. 584. Caluin from the Deuines (42) The Deuines of Germany alledged in this point by Sleydan in Comment Englished l. 7 fol. 87. of Germany from Melancthon (43) Melancth in Concâ— Theolog. pa. 618. from Peter (44) Peter Martyr in his discourse hereof recited in Melancth Treatise de Concil Theolog. p. 394. Martyr and to omit others from D. (45) Wâ—â—eâ— in Synops. printed 1600. pag. 612. 613. c. Willet That the Catholikes do with the like or greater feruour preach and practice thâ— same Doctrine of Recusancy is cleare by the Example in our owne Country where sinne Protestancy was first planted some scores besides of the Laity of Venerable learned priests haue chosen rather to suffâ—â— death in Queene Elizabeth her Reigne then once to goe to the Protestant Church their liues being commonly proffered them if they would conforme themselues and leaue their Recusancy But they loathed such Conditions For the more full proofe of this Verity I add the Testimonies of three most eminent most remarkable Men whose iudgments some yeares past being demanded whether the Catholikes of England might for sauing their goods liuings go to the Protestant Church to heare a Sermon did ioyntly condemne the same as most vnlawfull and impious The men were these Cardinall Bellarmine Cardinall Baronius and Mutiâ—â—Vitellescus now generall of the Order of the Society of Iesus I will heere set downe their owne words The Judgment of Cardinall Bellarmine COnsideratis rationibus pro vtraqueparte allatis existimo non licere viris Catholicis in Anglia Haereticorum adire Ecclesias multó minùs concionibus ipsorum interesse minimè autem omnium cum ipsis in precibus vel Psalmodia alijsque ipsorum Ecclesiasticis ritibus conuenire Ideo propria manu subscripsi Robertus Bellarminus Sanctae R. Ecclesiae Presbyter Cardinalis tituli Sanctae Mariae in via The iudgment of Cardinall Baronius VIsis consideratis quae superiùs diligenti peruestigatione in vtramque partem disputata reiectis omnino exufflatis quae pro parâ—e affirmatiua fuere proposita quòd scilicet liceret Catholicis adire Ecclesias Haereticorum vt superiùs sunt proposita inhaeremus saniori sententie posteriori ab Ecclesia Catholica antiquitùs recepta vsu probata quod scilicet ita facere pâ—â— non liceat quam rogo nostros Catholicos Anglâ—â— amplecti ex animo Caesar Cardinalis Baronius titul SS Nerei Achillei Presb. The iudgmeÌ„t of Mutius Vitellescus then Prouinciall now Generall of the Order of the Jesuits VJdi rationes quae in hoc Scripto pro vtraque parte afferuntur existimo non licere vâ— Catholicis in Anglia Ecclesias Haereticorâ—s adire c. Et puto hoc debere esse extra Contrâ—â—ersiam Mutius Vitellescus Prouincialis Romaâ— Prouin Societatis Iesu Thus much in generall touching the Doctrine of Recusancy mantayned by diueâ— learned Protestants and practised with losâ— of life by many Reuerend Priests here 〈◊〉 England and fortifyed with the iudgmeâ—â— of these three former most learned pious and godly Men. Animaduersion CLXXIX â—He most common abuse in England of taking a second wyfe during the lyfe of â—e first committing fornication induceth â—e to expound those words of our Sauiour â—om whence the offenders herein seeme to â—arrant their sensuall proceedings for thus â—â—r Sauiour in Mathew 19. speaketh Whosoeâ—er shall put away his wyfe except it be for forâ—â—tation and shall marry another doth commit â—dultery from which words our Aduersaâ—es seeme to infer that who doth put away â—s wyfe for fornication and marrieth anoâ—her doth not commit Adultery But this is â—hus answered To wit that this exception 〈◊〉 Fornication is only to shew that for this â—use a man may put away his wyfe for eâ—er but not that he may marry another as 〈◊〉 most playne in 5. Mark c. 10.
the supposed answering of those few chosen and picked out by him must serue through the partiality of iudgement in his followers to disgrace all the rest of the Corruptions or falsifications vrged by you Animaduersion LII THe Protestants in falsly alledging the authorityes of Authours do abuse their Readers chiefly foure seuerall wayes First which is the most vsuall by concealing some part of the alledged authority SecoÌ„dly by adding some words of his owne to make the produced Authour or Father to speake like a Protestant Thirdly by transposing the words of an authority thereby to make the sense different from the Authors true meaning Fourthly by a wilfull mistaking or confusion of tymes I will exemplify these foure sorts in the wryting of D. White a great Impostour in his Scripts in his booke called The way to the true Churcâ— Well then the said Protestant in p. 119. oâ— his said Booke produceth a place out of the Rhemists to proue that the Church of Româ— can make that Scripture which is not anâ— vnmake that to be Scripture which is Scripture To proue this he produceth the Rhâ—mists (y) Gaelat 1. thus saying The Scriptures are 〈◊〉 knowne to be true neither are Christians bonâ—â— to receiue them without the attestation of thâ— Church Now heere marke the true wordâ— of the Rhemists and therein obserue his impurity of dealing committed by concealing part of the Sentence iust crossing his intended drift of vrging that authority Their true words are these The Scriptures whicâ— are indeed of the Holy Ghosts inditing being pâ—â— into the Churches triall are found proued anâ— testifyed vnto the World to be such and not maâ—â— true altered or amended by the same Since the Holy Scriptures in themselues were alwayes true before but not so knowne to be to all Christians All these are the words of the Rhemists where you see the wilfull concealement of this Parcell The Scriptures are nâ—â— made true altered or amended by the Church as also that other the Holy Scripturs in themselues were alwaies true meaning without the attestation of the Church Now all that can truly be gathered out of this authority is that the Scriptures though most sacred and true in themselues cannot be so made knowne to vs in which words lyeth the touch of the point without the Churches attestation But how farre off is this from M. Whytes vrging of this place Touching his imposture committed in â—dding of words this one place shall serue Thus then the said D. White produceth Bellarmine in contempt of the Churches authority saying Other meanes may deceiue me but nothing is more knowne nothing more certaine then the Scriptures That it were the greatest madnes in the world not te belieue theÌ„ c. Now in this sentence these words viz. Other meanes may deceiue me are not in Bellarmine but most subtily added to the begining of Bellarmines words and caused to be printed in the same kynd of Character or letter wherein the other words of Bellarmine are printed thereby to make the Reader belieue that they are words of Bellarmine wheras they are added as I about insinuated for the more depressing of the Churches Authority Now the whole sentence of Bellarmine was directed against the Swinkseldians who absolutely denyed Scripture and against whom Bellarmine in that place disputeth Touching the fraud consisting in a cuÌ„ning transposition of words without adding any words to the authority alledged or concealing any parcell therof this example of the foresaid M. Whyte may serue In pag. 344. of his way to the true Church he produceth for the ouerthrow of the religious vse of Images the Councell of Eliberis thus saying No (z) Can. 36. Picture is to be made in the Church lest that be adored which is painted on the walls But the true words of the Canon are these Placâ—â—â— picturas in Ecclesia non habere ne quod coliâ—â— adoretur in parietibus depingatur Jt pleaseth the Councell that pictures should not be in the Church lest that which is worshipped anâ— adored be painted on the Walls The nyce difference in words resteth thus Lest that which is worshipped be painted and as Mâ— Whyte translateth Lest that which is painted be worshipped Where the words of the Councell acknowledging the worship of Images maketh the worship due to them to be the cause why they are not painted on the walls to wit because they were subiect to be defaced either by inuasion of Enemyes or rayne c. Now M. Whites translation only by a subtill transposition of the words imports that Pictures are not to be worshipped at all Lastly concerning the Calumny resting in a wilfull confusion of tymes The said Protestant in pag. 61. for proofe of Priests lawfull mariage produceth a Testimony from Sinesius Bishop of Ptolemais thus writing of himselfe to a friend The sacred hand of Theophilus hath giuen me a wyfe and hereupon Iustify to all men that J will neither forsake her nor priuily as an adulterer keep her Company but I will pray to God to send me by her many and good children This Epistle is at large set downe in (a) Eccl. hist l. 14. c. 55. Nicephorus Now heere tâ—e fraud lyeth that at the tyme when this Epistle was written Sinesius was but a Lay-man but eminent for learning Now after he made himselfe priest and was created Bishop of Ptolemais he euer liued separated from the company of his wyfe as fully appeareth out of Nicephorus in the place aboue alledged Here then the Ministers deceit lyeth in applying that to him as if he had beene then Bishop which was spoken by him being a Layman and so M. White most fraudulently confoundeth those two different tymes together as if all had hapned at one and the same tyme. Animaduersion LIII YF your Aduersary will vant that he will proue all by Scripture only as most of them giue it out they will then force him to draw both his Premisses I meane both his Propositions if so they should be reduced to a forme of Argument from the Scripture alone of which Method within two Arguments at least he is certaine to fayle For if he take either of his Propositions from humane Authority or from naturall Reason you may tell him he leaueth his vndertaken of prouing by Scripture alone and consequently you may deny his force of Argument though Logicall in forme Here I further aduertize that if your Aduersary vndertake the part of an Opponent tye him precisely euer to Oppose which Scene perhaps he being brought to a Non-plus would flyely transferre vpon you In like sort if he taketh vpon him to answere suffer him not to oppose thought he labour so to do to free himselfe from answering Thus be sure that ech of you keepe your chosen Station Animaduersion LIV. IF the Protestant should seeke to expouÌ„d by way of conference of places those words of our Sauiour This is my body this is my Bloud figuratiuely by those other words of his J
spake (e) Luth. tom 7. Wittenberg to him in a base great voice so as he made Luther to sweate his hart to tremble againe the same apppeareth in that Luther saith as is set downe aboue that he was first awake and that then after the Disputation begunne But howsoeuer admit it were but a spirituall fight or Disputation yet in either case the persuasions arguments wherunto Luther heere yealdeth came confessedly from the Diuell what difference then is there whether the Diuell made them to Luther by sensible coÌ„ference or by inward suggestion Animaduersion LIX AS Luther was instructed by the Diuel to impugne the Masse so were Carolostadius and Swinglius two great introducers of Protestancy in those former tymes in like manner indoctrinated by the Diuel against the Masse Touching Carolostadius whom Luther calleth a Man (f) Luth. in loc com Class 5. pag. 47. giuen ouer vnto a reprobate sense This man impugned the Masse vnder pretence of Visions and pretended conferences with God of whome the Booke entituled Conspiracy for pretended reformation thus writeth Carolostadius (g) Luth tom 3. Penens fol. 68. a preacher professing the Gospell c. attributed much to Cabinet teachers and pretended conference with God And yet his pretended visions were but meere Illusions of the Deuill of whom euen Luther thus sayth Carolostadius (h) In Theol. Calu in Prâ—â—em had his expositions from the Deuill As concerning Swinglius whom Conradus Schlusseâ—burg the Protestant calleth a man of vnfortunate memory This man disputed publikly at Zurick for the abolishing of the Masse and receaued confessedly his nightly Instruction by Dâ—eame from an Admonisher (i) So writeth Swinglius of himselfe herein tom 1. l. de sub fid Eucharist fol. 249. whether Black or Whyte sayth he I remember not Which Instruction is acknowledged by Protestants themselues to be a meere Imposture of Satan For thus hath Conradus Schlusselburg left recorded Sole (k) In Theol. Caluinist in â—roaem meridiano clartus est non Deum verum sed Diabolum ipsissimum c. It is more cleare then the Sunne that not the true God but the Deuill himselfe did inspire the Sacramentary Heresy into Swinglius by Dreame Thus far of these three former mayne Impostours I meane Luther Carolostadius and Swinglius all of them receauing their instruction from the Deuill for their abolishing and impugning of the Masse Animaduersion LX. DIuers Aâ—liaphorists or Neutralls in Religion do maintayne that whosoeuer belieueth the Apostles Creed liuing a good life may be saued Now that the Creed cannot be the Boundary or limit of Christian fayth is thus proued First because though the Protestant and the Catholike do indifferently repeat the Creede yet they vnderstand euery Article thereof in a different sense thâ—one from the other For example I belieue 1. in God The Catholike belieues that his God no way cooperateth or worketh sinne in man The Protestant belieues that God doth and therefore Beza sayth that God (l) In his Display of Popish practises p. 102. exciteth the wicked will of one thiefe to kill another And in Iesus 2. Christ his only Sonne The Catholike belieues in Christ who is God of God and equall to his Father who suffered Death quoad sufficientiam for all mankind A Sauiour who died only in Boâ—y and not in Soule Finally a Sauiour who from his first Conception was endued with all knowledge wisdome and prouidence exempt from all ignorance passion and perturbation The Protestant beliâ—ueth in Christ as his Sauiour yet in all these circumstances touching Christ differently from the Catholike Descended 3. into Hell The Catholike by Hell in this place vnderstandeth Limbus Patrum from whence our Sauiour did deliuer the soules of the lust there detayned till his comming But the greatest part of Protestants do vnderstand in this article the graue by the word Hell He 4. ascended into Heauen both the Catholiks and the Protestants do teach that Christ truly in body ascended vp into Heauen whereas the Lutherans (m) Luther bib de sacra Caena Domini tom 2. fol 11â— do teach that Christs Body is in all places with the Diuinity And that therefore it did not after his passion really ascend vp into Heauen it being there both before and after his passion To iudge 5. the quick and the Dead The Catholike belieues that Christ shall so iudge man as that his good works receauing all their force from our Sauiours Passion shal be rewarded The Protestant belieueth that Christ shall reward only a baâ—e and speciall fayth The like disparity of the beliefe of the Articles of the Creed by the Catholike and the Protestant might be exemplifyed in the other following Articles of the Creed here omitted for breuity Only I conclude that seeing it is the sense and not the words only which makes the Creed which Christians ought necessarily to belieue and seeing the Catholike the Protestant bâ—lieue the words therof in different or rather contrary senses therefore it followeth that it is not sufficient for a Christian in respect of fayth only nakedly to belieue the words of the Creed but he is obliged if so he expecteth saluation to belieue the Articles thereof in that sense and in no other wherein the Apostles did dictate them Animaduersion LXI ADmitting that both Protestant and Catholike did belieue the Creed in a true sense yet followeth it not that this beliefe I meane in respect of beliefe only were a sufficient beliefe or fayth for the saluation of Man The reason hereof is this because it is most certaine that there are diuers points of Christian Religion houlden necessarily to be belieued in the iudgment both of the Protestant and Catholike and yet the same points are not contayned or expressed in the Creed And to insist in these following 1. That there are certaine Diuine writings of infallible authority penned by the Holy Ghost which wâ— commonly call the Scriptures of the Old and New Testament 2. That there are spirituall substances which we call Angells and that many thousands of them did fall after their Creation and are become those malignant spirits which we call Deuills 3. That there is any materiall place of Hell for the wicked of which we find nothing in the iudgment of the Protestants seeing they vnderstand the graue by the word Hell in the Creed 4. That the paynes of the damned shal be for all Eternity 5. That Adam presently vpon his Creation did fall from the Grace of God and thereby transferred Originall sinne vpon all mankind 6. That the world was once drowned for sinne which inundation is commonly called Noes floud 7. That our Sauiour whilest he conuersed here vpon earth did worke any miracles 8. That S. Iohn Baptist was our Sauiours precursour or forerunner 9. That our Sauiour did chuse to him certaine Men for his Apostles who first did preach and plant the Christian fayth throughout the whole world 10. That Circumcision
is now forbidden as a thing vngodly 11. That there are any Sacraments of the New Testament instituted by Christ for the good of mans Soule Lastly to omit some others 12. That before the ending of the world Antichrist shall come who shal be a designed Enemy of Christ and shall labour to subuert and ouerthrow all Christian Religion All these points both Protestant and Catholike do belieue and hould that the beliefe of them is necessary to Saluation And yet not any of these Articles are expressed or set downe in the Creed Whence I conclude that the Apostles Creed cannot be a sufficient boundary to containe and limit an auayleable Fayth Animaduersion LXII THe bitter Inuectiues of the Protestants one against another are of sufficient force to discouer their dissentions in doctrine as where Luther sayth We (n) Luther in Thes Cont. Louaniens Thes 21. seriously iuâ—ge the Swinglians and Sacramentaries to be Heretiks and Aliens from the Church of God And to confront this Swinglius thus retorteth vpon Luther Luther (o) Swingl tom 2. in resp ad Luther fol 458. is guilty of high blasphemy against the nature and essence of God c. To descend to the Puritans and Protestants in England we find that the booke entituled Constitutions and Canons Ecclesiasticall printed anno â—604 doth ipso facto excommunicate the Puritans for their maintaining of these positions following as they are there set downe in the Booke The worship of the Church of England is corrupt superstitions vnlawfull repugnant to the Scriptures The Articles of the Bishops Religion are Erroneous their Rites Antichristian c. Now the Protestants do thus râ—quite the Puritans saying The (p) M. Powell in hâ—s consiâ—erations Puritans are notorious and manifest Schismaticks cut of from the Church And againe The (q) M. Paâ—ks in his Ep. Deâ—ic Puritans seeke to vndermyne the foundation of fayth Now add hereto that although infinite other passages might be brought to shew the great discord in fayth among the forraine Protestants yet there is no one more short Argument to conuince this point then to recur to the foure Catalogues of ProtestaÌ„t Books set downe in the later end of the Booke called The Protestants Apology of the Roman Church In which 4. Catalogues one may find about three hundred Bookes written in great acerbity of stile by one Protestant against another The names of all which books are taken out of Coccius his Thesaurus or from Hospinian both which Authouâ—s dyed many yeares since Now if so mâ—â—y Bookes of disagreements in fayth among the Protestants were made within so sport a Tyme how many hundred more might be alledged if one did know all other Bookes written by the Protestant against the Protestant since the death of those two former men Animaduersion LXIII MAny vulgar and vnlearned Protestants and especially the Caluinists Puritans do condemne the Catholike Roman Religion because it defendeth and practizeth diuers Ceremonyes they ignorantly tearming such Ceremonyes Idolatrous and superstitious And there is no one argument more preuayling with such men to auert them from our Catholike Religion theâ— this Now to take a way this scandall oâ— stumbling block I say that if it were God good pleasure to haue his Fayth and Religion of the old Testament which for the tyme was the true Religion to consisâ— much in Ceremonyes as we see it did faâ—â— out in the seuerall Sacrifices appoynted by God In the Tabernacle with the appurtenances and of what matter number and qualityes all things should be as also with prouiâ—ion of Oyle and Lampes The Arke The propitiatory the Consecration of priests the Institution of all vestures vessels and other holy things then belonging to the seruice of God all these to be made performed and done after a strange and different manner as we reade in Exodus As also the Institution of Circumcision consisting in paring away a piece of flesh which serued for freeing Man in that tyme from Originâ— Sinne the preparing and eating of the Paschall Lambe sprinkling the dores with the bloud thereof and infinit other Ceremonies recorded in the foresaid booke of Exodus I say if this was Gods vnsearcheable Will to ordaine these things during the tyme of the Old Law wherein he would haue the Honour Seruice and worship exhibited to â—im partly to consist why then may not our Sauiour institute the Religion fayth of Christians belieuing in him to be attended on with diuers Ceremonyes and yet this without any Superstition or Idolatry Now our Aduersaryes common euasion to this our Argument is to say that God instituted Ceremonyes in the Old Law to serue as figures or Types of things which were after to fall out in the New Law which Ceremonyes were theÌ„ to end vpon the promulgation of the fayth of Christ. This answeare is most impertinent First because not all the Ceremonyes in the Old Law but only some did serue as figures or Adumbrations of things to happen in the New Testament Secondly because the Question heere is not why or to what end the Ceremonyes of the Old Law were instituted but only whether Ceremonyes tending to the worship of God be pious lawfull Therefore I conclude that seeing the Ceremonies in the Old Law were instituted by Gods direction for the worship of him as we read in Exodus c. 8 Ostendas populo Caeremonias ritus colendi let the other secondary end of them be what it will that therefore and by force of Gods proceeding in the Old Law we Christians may not thinke strange that our Sauiour being God and Man would now in the New Law institute and giue to his Church the like power some Ceremonies and pâ—blike Rites wherewith he will be worshipped and wherin part of Christian religion shall consist Now therefore let our Aduâ—â—saries if they can giue any true reasoâ— why the Ceremâ—nies of the Old Law bâ—ing incomparably more in number shall be accounted lawfull and yet the Ceremonies of the New Law or Testament as long as they are reputed but Ceremonies must be râ—puted superstitions aâ— Idolatrous Animaduersion LXIV WE Catholikes charge the Protestaâ—â—â— with ancient Heresies For example wâ— shew how the Manichees according to S Austin depriued Man (r) L. de Haeres cap. 4â— of Freewill Hoâ— â—ouinian (s) Ier. l 1. cont Iâ—â—in Aug l. Haeres cap. taught that Fasting was not mâ—ritorious and Virginity was no better theâ— wedlock or mariage How Aerius (t) Austin l. de Haeres c. 33. taugâ— it to be most vnlawfull to pray or offerâ—â— Sacrifice for the Dead How the Arians (u) L. 1. cont Marin cap. â— reiected all vnwritten Traditions who aâ—â—â— (x) Athanas in Apolog. pro fuga perpetrated Sacrilege against the Sacraments Altars Priests and Religious person How the (y) Austin l. â— Vnitate cap. 12. Donatists taught the Churcâ— of Christ to be Jnuisible How the Deniall 〈◊〉 the Reall Presence was condemned by certaine ancient Heretiks
haue done in prayse of our Blessed Lady or in honour of the Crosse or the like then being taken literally can well be iustifyed But they were more bold so to write because they as then hauing no Aduersaries to their Catholike doctrine in those points might rest assured that their words would be taken in that pious sense wherein they deliuered them Of which kind of their writing our Aduersaries take hould against the said Fathers The last obseruation heere shal be that when the Catholikes do alledg the Fathers the Protestants seeke to charge the said Fathers so alleged with some one Errour or other and therefore say they his authority is to be reiected in any other point which especially happeneth in Tertullian Origen Cyprian as is aboue intimated But to this you may answere that you produce the Fathers only in such Catholike points touching the which they were not written against by any other Father and therefore their authority therein is of force since it is presumed hereby that all the other Fathers and consequently all the Church of God agreed with them therein Animaduersion LXVIII YF your Aduersaries pretend that all the wrytings and memory of Protestants in former ages were extinguished by the Popes of the said and after succeeding ages you may shew how absurd this Assertion is And the reason hereof is in that the Popes of those tymes could not presage that Protestancy should in these our tymes sway more then any other Heresies condemned in their very tymes which other Heresies remayne yet registred to this very day by the acknowledgment of the Protestants Againe the personall (x) Benedictus the third was written against by the Councell of Constance Gregory the sâ—auenth by Benno Eugeniuâ— the Pope was written against by the Councell of Basill vices and faults of some Popes are recorded in histories yet to be read Is it then probable that the Popes were so solicitous to extinguish all remembrance of the Protestant fayth yet content to suffer their owne lesse iustifiable liues of themselues and their predecessours to be registred for all ages after to peruse Lastly in the Canons of ech age there is made mention of all particular Heresies of those tymes condemned by the said Councells Stands it then with any shew of Reason that the Pope and the Councells should be so voyd of iudgment as carefully to register all other impugned Heresies and on the other syde as carefully to suppresse all arising opinions of Protestancy Animaduersion LXIX YF you intend to bring and obiect any foule and wicked sayings especially out of Luther against the Blessed Trinity or about his acknowledged Lust and sensuality be carefull to note the Edition of the Booke wherein such sayings are to be found For in some later Editions of his workes many such sentences are for very shame left out and vnprinted And thereupon there are diuers Protestants who vtterly deny that euer any such wicked or sensuall words were written by him Animaduersion LXX OVr Aduersaryes labour by seueral wayes to depresse the force of Miracles exhibited in proofe of the Roman Religion For first some of them do deny the working of all Miracles and to fortify this their denyall they thinke it sufficient if they can produce but any one or two strange relations supposed to be Miracles and yet after discouered to be but forgeryes to the disgracing of all true Miracles but this euasion is weake seeing by force thereof we should deny all the bookes of Scripture because some false wrytings were in the Primitiue Church obtruded vnder the names of the Apostles as (y) Cont Aduers log prophet l. 1. c. 20. Austin and (z) Hist l. 3. c 19. Eusebius do record Againe if they will deny all Miracles they may also by the same reason deny all History eyther prophane or Ecclesiasticall Therefore if we will ascribe so much confidence to the wrytings of Eusebius Zozomene Austin Ierome and others as we do to the lyues of Liuy or Commentaryes of Cesar or to Speeds Cronicle we cannot reiect all Miracles for forgeryes vntruths Other of our Aduersaryes confesse the doing of many Miracles vrged by the Catholykes but then they ascribe them to the power of the Diuell and do commonly style them Antichristian (a) So do the Cent. call them Cent. 4. col 1445. Cent. 5 1486. In like manner Osiand also stileth them Cent. 10. 11. 12. wounders and lying signes But against this subterfugion I say it cannot be applyed to the Miracles wrought in the primitiue Church and eecorded by Zozomene Austin Ierome and others long before the comming of Antichrist since most of our Aduersaryes do place Antichrists first comming in (b) So doth D. Willet teach in his Synop. p. 160. D. Fulke in his answere to a counterf Cath. p. 36. D. Downenam in but his Treatise of Antichrist lib. 2. pag. 4. Boniface who was Pope in the yeare 1006. loÌ„g after the dayes of the former Fathers Secondly I say that our Aduersaryes in ascribing the Miracles to the working of Antichrist consequently of the Diuell do ouer neere interleage with the Iewes condemning the Miracles of Christ in these wordes This man (c) Math. 1. casteth not out Deuills but by Belsebub the Prince of Deuills Agaiâ—â— I say that the Protestant Vrsinus trulâ— sayth that the (d) In Comment Catech. 21. Power of the Miracles oâ— Antichrist are not true Miracles but such aâ— the Order of Nature obserued may be effected by the deceyte of men or Deuills But diuers miracles are recorded which transcend the power of the Deuill as to stay the flux and reflux of the sea or to cure incurable diseases without applying any secondary meanes and such like c. Of which there are many miracles recorded by the former Fathers Thirdly I auer that the Miracles of the Deuill are euer done to some vaine and pernicious end and not for the good of the particular person vpon whom they are wrought Fourthly if the Deuill could effect such stupendious workes how chanceth it that he would neuer concurre with condemned and on all sydes acknowledged miscreants to strenghthen and countenance thereby those mens misbeliefe and Heresies I meane with Simon Magus Porphiry Iulian the Apostata Mahomet c. and other Sects condemned euen by the Protestants for most erroneous Lastly I conclude that our Aduersaries in condemning all Miracles either but as forgeries or as the Works of the Deuill do charge diuers Princes Commonwealths Ecclesiasticall persons and infinite multitudes of people both of former and later tymes with extreme simplicity yea Lunacy in suffering such forgeries and delusions to be obtruded vpon them I will adioyne hereto the miraculous preseruation for many hundred yeares of certaine Relicks I will passe ouer the vncorrupted bodies of many Saints euen till this day and will insist in the miraculous preseruation of the Eucharist stabbed with knyfes by the Iewes many scores of yeares since if not
Damnatioâ— And D. Whitaker thus auerreth It (h) Controuers 2. q. 5. cap. 9. is false that Hereticall and Schismaticall Churches are true Churches Thus far of our Aduersaries excluding Papists Anabaptists Arians Heretikes and Schismatiks from the Protestant Church and not acknowledging them to be members thereof nor their Doctrines Protestancy Now we will obserue what change and mutability of iudgment herein our Aduersaries shew at other tymes in willingly embracing all these former sort of men and some others also as good Protestants and in state of Saluation And first of the Papists Luther sayth In (i) In Ep. contra Anabapt the Popery there is true Christianity yea the Kernell of Christianity many pious great Saincts M. Hooker (k) L. Eccles Pol. 3. c. 1â—8 we gladly acknowledg them of Rome to be of the family of Iesus Christ and M. Bunny we (l) In his Treatise of pacification sect 18. are no seuerall Church from the Papists nor they from vs. The Anabaptists are admitted for good Protestants by Oecolampadius saying (m) L. 2. Ep. p. 63. Baptisme is an externall thing which by Law of Charity may be dispensed with And D. (n) In his answere to the Protest Apol. l. 4 cap. 3. sect 10. Morton we Protestants iudge the state of the Anabaptists not to be vtterly desperate The Arians are acknowledged by M. Morton to be of the same Church of which the Protestants are and he giueth his reason in these words Because (o) In his booke of the kingdom of Isâ—ael and the Church pag. â—4 the Arians hould the foundation of the Gospell And M. Hooker seemeth to intimate the same in these words The (p) Eccles Pol. lib. 4 p. 181. Arians in the reformed Churches of Poland c. hereby insinuating that those Protestant Churches of Poland did acknowledg the Arians to be members of their Church Of Idolaters M. Hooker thus fauorably writeth Christians (q) Eccles Pol. l. 3 pag. 1â—0 by externall profession they are all whose marke of recognizance hath in it those things which we haue mentioned yea although they be impious Idolaters wicked Hâ—tikes c. Infideâ—ls are also in our Aduersaâ—â—â— iudgments mâ—mbers of a sauing Churchâ— fayth for thus writeth Swinglius Ethâ—â—â— (r) Swingl Ep Oecolam l. 1. p 39 si piam mentem domi fouerit Christianus 〈◊〉 etiamsi hristum ignoret And hereupon Sâ—â—glius concluâ—eth that (s) Swingâ— tom 2. fol. 118. 559. Hercules Socrates â—ristides are now in Heauen as is in anothâ—â— place shewed Finally the Protestants are 〈◊〉 courteous as that they are content to â—â—corporate Antichrist within their Church 〈◊〉 state of Saluation This I thus proue I◠〈◊〉 ouermuch knowne and diuulged that mâ—ny Protestants do teach with full moutâ— that the Pope is Antichrist Now then let 〈◊〉 see how at other times they write of hiâ— whom they hould to be Antichrist and 〈◊〉 Religion Antichristianity Here then we fâ—â—â— D. Whitaker thus to acknowledg I will (t) D White in his answere to the first Demonstration of D. Sanders not say that from the tyme that Papistry begâ—â— to be Antichristianity the Popes themseâ—â—â— haue beene all damned And yet D. Whitaker 〈◊〉 where confidently auerreth the Pope to be Antichrist In like sort M. Powell hath the like sentence saying I will (u) In his answere to the last Demonstration of D. Sanders in no wise say that all the Popes from the tyme that papistry was first reuealed to be Antichristianity aâ—â— damned Thus much of this point whereby we may discerne the wounderfull and vnheard mutability of our Aduersaries Iudgments touching who are Protestants and Professours of that Church wherein a man may be saued A demonstration vnansâ—erabâ—e â—â—le and irrepliable to proue that the Proâ—â—â—â—ant Church and fayth such as these forâ—â—r men do restrayne or enlarge it is 〈◊〉 capable of Saluation And how then can Christian know if he will rely vpon the â—â—gments of Protestants herein to what 〈◊〉 of Protestants or within what Church 〈◊〉 may range himself for the Saluation of 〈◊〉 Soule Animaduersion LXXXXVIII â—N that there are many Catholike Articles the which the Iewes before the comâ—ing of Christ did belieue therefore it folâ—â—weth euidently that the said Articles canâ—ot be reputed to be Innouations or lately â—â—uented Doctrines but as ancient as the â—ymes before our Sauiours Incarnation I â—ill exemplify in some The Booke Eccleâ—â—asticus admit for the tyme it be not Scripture speaketh directly of our Sauiours â—â—scending into Hell in those words where it â—s said in his person I (x Eccles 24. will pierce through â—â—e sower parts of the Earth J will looke vpon all such as be a sleepe and will lighten all them that â—â—ust in the Lord A saying so pertinent for proofe of Limbus Patrum that D. Whitaker (y) Contra Duraeum l. 8 pag. 5â—7 acknowledging the true sense thereof auoydeth it by saying the Booke is not Canonicall which at this present is impertiâ—ent since here I seeke only to proue the â—â—uth of diuers of our Catholike points as being belieued by the Ancient Iewes before our Sauiours tyme in their writings whether Canonicall or not Canonicall Touching Prayer for the Dead It is warranted by the example of Iudas (z) Machab 2. Machabaeus the true seruant of God as also is taught by Rabbi Simeon who liued before Christ and diuers other ancient Rabbyes Rabbi Simeon thus writing of such as are temporally punished after this life After (a) In lib. Zoar. in cap 13. Genesis they are purged from the filth of their sinnes then doth God cause them to ascend out of that place Touching Gods Induration or hardning of Pharaos hart the Iewish Rabins so conspire in affirming with vs the same to be by Gods permission only and not by his working that Peter (b) Peter Martyr in Epist. ad Roman c. 9. Martyr and Munster (c) Munster in Annot. in Exod. c. 7. do accordingly acknowledg this Exposition Concerning Freewill that place in Eccâ—esiasticus (d) Ecclesiast 1â— to wit Say not thou he hath câ—â—sed me to erre Yf thou wilt thou shalt obserue the Commandements He hath set water and fyre before thee stretch out thy hand to which thou wilt Before man is life and death Good Euâ—â—â— what lyketh him shal be giuen him This testimony I say is so euident for Freewill that D. Whitaker in answere thereto reiecteth the authority saying De loco (e) In resp ad ras Camp rat 1 p. 25. Ecclesiasticiparùm laboro c. J make small account of Ecclesiasticus Philo the learned Iew who liued in Christ his tyme thus writeth Man (f) Philo in lib. quod Deus fit immutabelis hath Freewill to which purpose is extant the Oracle in Deuteronomy I haue placed before thee Lyfe and Death Good and Euill chuse Lyfe Concerning Angells Saints the Booke of Tobias written before Christ is so playne (g) Tob.
to be really in the Eucharist since by this reason say they it may become rotten and mouldy and be eaten by myce should passe to the belly and so to the common passage To this I answeare that these supposed indignityes do not touch the body of Christ but only affect the species and forme of the Eucharist which is ioyned with the body Againe seeing our Christian fayth teacheth vs that Christ was included for a long tyme within the Wombe of the Blessed Virgin being a Woman that he was swadled and lapped in Cloaths that then he might fall vpon the earth and might also haue beene eaten with beasts or burnt if so by miracle he were not preserued from such mischances if rheÌ„ he was truly and in his owne person subiect to all these difficultyes without any dishonour what dishonour is it to him if he did vndergo in another forme the former supposed Indecencyes vrged by our Aduersaryes Againe the former Indignityes do no more truly and properly touch the body of Christ then the Diuinity which being in all places can be said to be burnt it being in the fyre or being rotten it being in bodyes that are rotten c. Animaduersion CXXIX OVr Aduersaries draw another argument taken from the vnprofitablenes of the Reall Presence in the Eucharist Thus they dispute The reall being of Christs body in the Eucharist is needles in that seeing the end and fruite of the Eucharist is to nourish the Soule and this nourishment consisting in fayth and Charity may as auayleably be performed by apprehending Christ by fayth as he is only in Heauen it therefore followeth that no profit aryseth from the Catholike doctrine herein which is not by other meanes as well effected To this I answere first that it is false to say that the same fruite is reaped by Christ in Heauen as by receauing him really into our bodies since Experience doth witnesse that by this receauing him in the Eucharist our Fayth Charity Deuotion and Reuerence are more encreased Besides our reall coniunction with Christ affordeth many benefits to the soule which Christ giueth not without this Coniunction no otherwise then he cured all such who touched the Hemme of his garment whom he would not haue cured though otherwise he could if they had not touched it Secondly I affirme It is a false â—â—â—ation to conclude It was not conuenient that Christ should be really in the Eucharist because the fruite reaped thereby may be obtained by other meanes For that is profitable which doth confer any Good though the same good may be obtayned otherwise For one drop of Christs bloud or any other laborious worke vndertakâ—n by him for our good had beene sufficient for our Redemption yet it followeth not that all his paines labours effusion of bloud yea death it selfe were vnprofitably and bootelesly performed Yea God could haue redeemed the world without the Incarnation of Christâ— shall we therefore say that the Incarnation of Christ was needles inconuenient and vnprofitable Animaduersion CXXX WHereas aboue there haue beene alledged diuers testimonies out of the Iewes and ancient Rabins in proofe of diuers Articles of our Roman Catholike fayth particularly of the Sacrifice which the Rabins say the Messias shall make at his comming our Aduersaries seeke to euade the force of all the Iewish Rabins authorities by saying that those testimonies of the Rabins were first forged by Galatinus and fathered vpon the Iewes for their greater credit And according hereto we find D. Whitaker thus to answere Dureus who vrged some Jewish sentences out of Galatinus for proofe of the Reall Presence and Sacrifice Tuum (h) Whitak contra Duraeum pag. 818. in hac causa Petrum Galatinum minimè profectò desideramus nec Haebreorum testimonijs illis indigemus Now to free Galatinus from suspition of forging all such sentences of the Rabins in fauour of Christianity and of Articles of our Roman Religion I answere hereto and say that one Hieronymus de Sancta fide being a Jew and conuerted to Christianity in the tyme before Galatinus whose Physitian he was did write a booke entituling it Hebraeo-mastrix or vindex impietatis perfidiae Iudaicae wherein he proueth diuers points of Christianity from the there allâ—dged â—estimonies and sentences of the said formâ—r Iewes mentioned by Galatinus This booke of his was printed at Franckford anno 1602. Animaduersion CXXXI IT is much obserued how our Aduersaries in answering to Catholike Bookes often giue slip to the argument or authority produced and in lieu thereof either by degrees flye to the state of the Question as though afore it were not acknowledged or to the Scripture themselues only interpreting the same where they may range vp and downe ar large or to some by circumstance meerely accessory to the Question and difficulty disputed of or do vse deceytefull resemblance and exchange of matter subtilly conueyed and brought in by tedious entertainment of prolonged discourse and all this to hold the Reader therewith that so vnespiedly they may diuert the Readers eye and memory being thus fixed vpon their digressions from the authority and reason alledged Here also may alledge their accustomed practize in printing the Catholikes Books at large their answere conioyned thereto in the same bulke or volume Their vsuall imposture then is to cause the Catholike authors words to be set downe in a most little obscure and darke letter or Character thereby to withdraw the Readers eye from perusing and reading it at large whereas their answere thereto they procure to be printed in a fayre and great Character or letter that so they may more easely inuite the Reader to the full perusing of it And this sleight is particularly besides in others manifested in D. Whitakers Answere to B. Father Câ—â—pian his ten Reasons in his Challenge to the two Vniuersities also in D. White his Booke against his Aduersaries entituled The way to the true Church Animaduersion CXXXII YF many miracles were wrought concerning Christs body before and whiles he here conuersed vpon earth may not then a man be more easely induced to belieue the great Miracle of his body in the Institution of the Eucharist A litle before the Natiuity thereof we reade Coâ—ceptus est de Spiritis Sancto At the very instant of his birth Natus est ex Maria Virgine some small tyme after his deathe Tertia die resurrexit vpon his last departure from vs Ascendit ad Caelos In all which passages Nature herselfe was if not dissolued at least suspended yea whi es he here conuersed vpon earth the samâ— sacred body of Christ was sometimes nourished without (i) To wit during Christs fast of forty dayes eating at other tymes did eate without (k) WheÌ„ he did eate with his Apostles after his Resurrection any nourishment thereby furthermore the same body remayning Visible (l) According to Luc. 4. Ipse transient peâ— medium illorum ibat became Jnuisible To conclude â—hrist blessed body did walke (m)
exhort the Reader to the perusing of the foresaid Booke Animaduersion CLXI GRammaticall and literall construction of the words of Scripture is euer houlden the best and securest euen in the iudgment of our learned Aduersaries for thus D. Whitaker writes of this point Qui (58) Whitak de sacra scriptura coÌ„tra Bellarm controu 1. q. 4 pa. 381. potest Grammaticum sensum Scripturae vbique assequi is optimè proculdubio Scripturas explanabit atque interpretabitur And Melancthon accordeth thereunto saying (59) Melancth l. 1. Epist. Iusto Ionae pag. 455. Multas magnat res antea inuolutas Syntaxis profert expouit The syntax doth explayne many things afore inuolued with difficulties Lastly to omit others (60) Zanchius de sacra scriptura p. 388. Zanchius the great Protestant much relyeth vpon the Grammaticall and Literall sense of the Scripture Now this principle and ground being granted as in reason it ought to be how great is our Aduantage herein against our Aduersaries who reiecting the Grammaticall and literall Sense of the passages of Scripture by vs insisted vpon do euer seeke to interpret them figuratiuely or allegorically For Example we rest in the Grammaticall sense and construction of that passage This is (61) Mat. 16. my body c. This is my bloud c. In like sort for the Primacy of Peter we vrge the literall sense of that passage Thou (62) Mat. 16. art Peter and vpon this Rock I will build my Church and the Gates of Hell shall not preuaile against it Also for remission of Sinnes by man Whose sinnes (63) Ioan. 20. you shall forgiue they are forgiuen them and whose sinnes you shall retayne they are retayned And more touching works Do you not see that (64) Luc. 3. man is iustifyed by Works and not by fayth only Finally to omit infinit other testimonies that perspicuous place for remitting of Originall sinne by Baptisme Except a man (65) Ioan. 3. be borne againe of Water and the spirit he cannot enter into the Kingdome of Heauen In all which places we do vrge the Grammaticall playne and literall sense whereas our Aduersaries seeke to expound all the said diuine Authorities by figures and Tropes Add hereto that the Protestants in their vrging of Scripture against vs do for the most part alledge it not in its literall or immediat Grammaticall sense but in some secondary sense seconded by Inferences and deductions at most but probable though often absurd and false Animaduersion CLXII THe prayses giuen to S. Austin by the Protestants are most great For first Luther thus speaketh of him Since (66) Luther in tom 7. wittenb fol. 405. the Apostles tymes the Church neuer had a better Doctour then S. Austin And againe After the (67) Luth loc com class p. 45. sacred Scriptures there is no Doctour in the Church who is to be compared to Austin D. Fyeld thus extolleth him Austin the (68) Of the Church l. 3 fol. 170. greatest of all the Fathers and worthiest Deuine the Church of God euer had since the Apostles times D. Couell Austin (69) D. Couell in his answere to Iohn Burges p. 3. was a man far beyond all that euer went before him or shall in likâ—lyhood follow after him both for Diuine and humane learning M. Forrester a Protestant styleth Austin That (70) â—orrester in Monas Tessagraphica c 〈◊〉 proaemio par 3. Monarch of the Fathers S. Austin Gomarus another Protestant thus celebrateth S. Austin (71) Gomarus in his spec verae Ecclesia p. 96. Austin of all the Fathers is houlden most pure in thâ— opinion of all Finally Caluin thus writeth Austin (72) Calu. Instâ—â— l. 3 cap. 3. sect 10. only is sufficient to shew the iudgment of the ancient Church Now in this next place let vs take a view of what Religion S. Austin was I meanâ— whether a Papist as we are termed or a Protestant and this euen from the writingâ— and Confessions of the Protestants themselues And first in proofe that Gods foreknowledge doth not necessitate or restrayne the 〈◊〉 in her actions contrary to the Iudgâ—ent of most Protestants Saint Austin is so â—â—ll therein that Polanus (73) Pol. in his Symphonia c. 2. p. 114. the Proteâ—â—ant alledgeth seueral authorities out of Austin in defence thereof 2. Touching the induration of Pharoes hart â—y God S. Austin teacheth that this was â—nly through Permission and not through â—y Positiue actuall working of God and â—â—erefore this Father is reprehended by Calâ—â—s saying (74) Caluin Inst. l. 2. c. 4. sect 3. Austin was not free from that â—â—erstition where he sayth that Induration â—iâ—â—ration pertaine not to the working of God â—â—to his foreknowledg â— S. Austin is so expresse and euident that Gods Commandements are not impossible that â—elancthon forbeareth not to confesse and â—prehend to vse his owne words Imagiâ—â—tionem (75) Melancthon l. 1. Ep. p. 290. Augustini de impletione legis 4. S. Austin taught that Christ from his â—atiuity was free from Ignorance This is â—â—nfessed by Danaeus the great Protestant 〈◊〉 these words (76) Danaeus respons ad Bellarm. ad 2. Controu c. 1. p. 145. Austin l. 2. c. 29. de pec 〈◊〉 denyeth Christ to haue taken Childrens inâ—â—nities and ignorance which to be false with â—â—ue of so great a man J haue shewed before 5. That Christ after his Death descended inâ— Hell Doctour (77) Bilson in his Suruey of Christs suffering pag. 616. 598. 599. Bilson produceth teâ—â—monies out of S. Austin in proofe thereof 6. That Christ penetrated the Dores when 〈◊〉 came to his disciples so as his body at â—ut tyme was without all circumscription (78) RuÌ„gius in disput 11 ex Epist. ad Cor. 1. fol. 83. Rungius the Protestant affirmeth it to be the doctrine of S. Austin 7. That the Blessed Virgin Mary was assumpted vp into Heauen according to the iudgment of Austin is confessed by the Centurists who professing to set downe a Catalogue of Bookes written by S. Austin do number and place among his other Bookes (79) Centur 5. c. 10. col 1122. one booke thus entituled De Assumptione Viâ—ginis Mariae l. 1. 8. In like sort the Centurists do alledge confesse out of S. Austin touching the Blessed Virgin being free from Originall sinne in this manner As (80) Centur 5. c. 4. col 499. touching Originall sinne forasmuch as concerneth Mary Austin writeth Excepting the holy Virgin Mary of whom in honour of our Lord when we treat of sinnes J will haue no question at all c. This therefore Virgin Mary excepted c. Thus much do the Centurists alledge out of S. Austin 9. That Austin taught that the Blessed Virgin vowed Chastity is confessed by D. Fulke who most scornfully chargeth S. Austin therein with a Non (81) Fulk against the Rhemish Testament in Luc c 1. sequitur saying although S. Austin gathered she vowed
For that the Soule of Man to be in the body it is necessary that it becommeth the Forme of the body and that so it be ioyned with the body as that one man be made of the body and the Soule But it is not neeedfull that God should become the Soule of the world neither that of him and the world one compounded substance should be made For God out of his immensity is in euery place out of his indiuisible vnity is whole wheresoeuer he is and out of his Omnipotency doth gouerne support and moue all things Furthermore the Soule of Man though it may be said to be in the whole body yet properly it is not but in such parts of the body as haue lyfe and therefore it is not in the Humours in the Hayres of the heade in the nayles But God is absolutly in al things and not only in corporall but euen in spirituall things for it is impossible that any thing should be in which God is not Lastly the Soule is not but in the body and that being but small and of a narrow compasse so as the parts thereof during the staying of the Soule therin must be continued and ioyned together for if any part of the body be separated or deuided from the rest in that part or member so deuided the Soule cannot be But God is whole euen in the Vniuersity or frame of all things created though that frame be great and the parts thereof become separated and deuided asunder Yea if a second or third World or more should be created God would be in them all and in euery part of them for where God should not be there nothing should be So true are those words of Holy writ 2. Par. 6. Caelum Caell Caelorum non te capiunt Thus far touching the similitude resemblance which the Soule of Man hath with his Creatour the similitude being so great as is aboue touched as that there is no other way by the which a man may more easely â—scend to know in part what God is then from the consideration or contemplation what the Soule of Man is with so iust reason we read it said by God himself when he first created Man Let vs make man in our Jmage according to our lyknes Genes 1. And with this I impose an end to these my Animaduersions A Pareneticall Conclusion to the younger Sort of Priests and Students of the English Seminaries exhorting them to the study of Controuersies in Fayth and Religion THus farre Reuerend Friends and Brethren you see I haue proceeded in this Miscellane and indigested Tract These Animaduersions may serue as certaine prelibations or foretasts of Controuersyes in fayth Yf so you shall reape profit thereby O how abundantly shall I hould my small labour therein taken to be recompenced but if they should not find that full successe with you which I desire yet let your charitable acceptance in part imitate the Abysmall and bottomlesse charity of God who placeth a good intention only where further Ability or other Circumstances are wanting and a good worke actually performed in one and the saâ—â— ballance But now before my pen giueâ— you its last farewell let me take leaue witâ— your good allowance to expatiate a liâ—â— in discourse thereby to persuade you tâ— more forcibly to the particular study oâ— English Controuersyes in fayth and Religion 〈◊〉 Prouince or charge most peculiarly in my iudgment incumbent vpon you in regarâ— of your mayne proiects determinations espoused as I may say to the Saluation 〈◊〉 soules You are hereafter in England to encouâ—ter with Protestants your professed Aduersaries in fayth Imitate then a skilfuâ— Generall in the warres who laboureth noâ— only to hinder his Enemies attempts anâ— approaches but withall seeketh to assauâ—â— his Enemyes So here you haue vndertaken both a Defensiue as also an Offensiue War prepare your selues then not only to mantaine by way of disputation and proofes your owne Catholike Religion but be also prest which is partly coincident with the former by all forces both Diuine humane to make violent incursions vpon Heresy or Innouation in Religion For your greater encouragement hereto obserue this following That Prince would hould it for a great Aduantage to wage such a war wherein he were assured that many of his Enemyes souldiers would fight in his behalfe And yet your Case is heere the same â—â—nce in this your spirituall Combat or â—ookwar with Heresy you haue the volunâ—ary and vncoacted confessions of your Adâ—ersaries euen fighting on your side As â—ou may euidenly discerne by the many â—cknowledgments of the Protestants deâ—iuered in seuerall former Animaduersions against themselues and in strenghtning of our Roman Religion Thus you draw a Sword from the Enemyes syde and after sheath it in his owne bowells The most illustrious and worthy Cardinall Bellarmine that chiefe Heresy-Mastix of this age in his Preface to the Bookes of his (1) Prefixed before his Tome de verbo Dâ—i Controuersies vndertaketh to shew the Necessity of study of Controuersies in this our age I presume his words will be most preuayling with you all and therefore I haue thought fit to set them downe in this place by translating them into English for the better satisfaction euen of the more vulgar Reader Thus then he writeth Vtilitas quidem propositarum nobis Disputationum ex eo intelligi facile potest c. The profit of the Disputations vndertaken by vs may easely from hence be apprehended Agendum est enim non de stillicidijs fundis non de rebus leuibus c. For heere we are to discourse not of the droppings of the caues of a House not of farmes or Country Houses not of small and light matters little auayling whether they be after one manner or other Neither are we to dispute of Metaphysicall subtiltyes of which without anâ— detriment to the soule a man may be ignorant the which may sometymes be impugned wiâ—â— Commendation and prayse of the Opponent Bâ—â— here we are to dispute of God of Christ of the Church of the Sacraments of Justification of the ayde of Grace of the freedome of Mans Wâ—â— and of many other most graue most difficult anâ— most abâ—â—ruse points which belong euen to the foundation and essence of fayth Of all which seuerall Articles if a man laboreth by disputation to weaken but any One then as S. Austin (2) Austiâ— lib. 1. contra Iulian. cap. 2. prudently admonisheth that man seeketh to ouerthrow the whole frame of that which we belieue in Christ. Furthermore to recall Hereticaâ—l men to the light of sayth or at least to represse breake their force and fury to dryue awaâ— those fierce Beasts from our Lords sheepefold to protect and defend the Church of Christ to rescue or snatch away the sheepe already taken from the iawes of those Wolfes and to bring them hack vnto our Lords custody How great here I demand is this Benefit how true a cause