Eleutherius told d. See M. Broughtons Eccles Historie of great Brittaine 2. Age c. 14. Lucius that He the king was Gods Vicar in his kingdome Ergo one of the two if not both was a Protestant would haue subscribed to the 39. Articles Policrates and the Easterne Churches contradicted Victor who was in the e. Victoris sententiam probauerunt pp. CoÌ„cilij Nicaeni vt patet ex Euseb l. 3. de Vita Constant Et deinceps Haeretici habiti sunt qui contrarium senserunt vt pater ex Epiphan haer 50. Aug. haeres 29 Bell. li. 2 de Pont c 19. Irenaeus victorem ne tam multas Ecclesias omnino propter traditionis ex antiqua consuetudine inter illas vsurpatae obseruationem à corpore vniuersae Christi Ecclesiae penitus amputet appositè conuenienter admonet Euseb l. 5. Hist c. 24. right about the time of keeping Easter Ergo they were Protestants and would haue subscribed to the 39. Articles Irenaeus held the Apostles Creed and saies too that the Scriptures are in their kind f. Vnum quodque maximè tunc est perfectum cùm propriam virtutem est consecutum maximé secundum naturam sicut circulus tunc maximè secundum naturam est quando maximè circulus est Arist 7. Phys â— 18. Yet is Irenaeus for Tradition verie full l. 3. aduers Haeres c 3 Maximae antiquissimae omnibus cognitae à gloriosissimis duobus Apostolis Petro Paulo Romae fundatae Ecclesiae eam quam habet ab Apostolis traditionem annunciatam hominibus fidem per successiones Episcoporum peruenientem ad nos indicantes confundimus omnes eos qui quoquo modo vel per vanam gloriam vel per coecitatem malam sententiam praeterquam oportet colligunt Ad hanc enim Ecclesiam propter potâ—ntiorem prâ—ncipalitatem necesse est omnem conuenire Ecclesiam hoc est â—os qui sunt vndique fideles in qua semper ab his qui sunt vndique conseruata est ea quae est ab Apostolis traditio And in the next chapter Quid antem si neque Apostoli quidem Scripturas reliquissent nobis nonne oportebat oâ—dâ—nem sequi traditionis quam tradideruntiis quibus committebant Ecclesias cui ordinationi assentiunt multae gentes Barbarorum eorum qui in Christum credunt sine charactere vel atramento scriptam habentes per Spiritum in cordibus salutem veterem traditionem diligenter custodientes c By the way obserue what he thought of the Vniuersalitie of Iurisdiction which the Church of Rome hath Necesse est omnem EcclesiaÌ„ c. and his reason propter potentiorem principalitatem· The words of Eusebius if they be well lookt into import the same ne à corpore Vniuersae Christi Ecclésiae penitus amputet vt supra perfect that our Sauiour taking g. Accipiens panem suum corpus confitebatur how the Euangelist declares Iesus tooke bread and blessed iâ— c and said take eate This is my bodie Mat. 26. temperamentum calicis sui sanguinem confirmauit this is my blood of the new testament which is shed for many vnto remission of sinnes Ibiâ—em â— Iraen li. 4. c. 57. Our Sauiours words the words of consecration were practicall and did inferre what they signifie as you see by Antiquitie confessed Suprà pag. 479 seq where this Father is also amongst the rest And that he did vnto he change require omnipotencie as principall you may know by his owne wordes also li. 4. c. 34. Quomodo constabit â—is he speakes of Hereticks who denied our Sauiour to be omnipotent eum pâ—nem in quo gratiae actae sunt esse corpus Domini sui calicem sanguinis eius si non ipsum Fabricatoris mundi filium dicant id est Verbum eius per quod lignum fructificat c. bread into his hands said Hoc est corpus meum the words of consecratioÌ„ that the Gâ—osticks vsed Heatheriâ—h rights towards h Artes magicas operantur ipsi Carpocratiani incantationes philtra quoque â—hâ—titesiâ— c dicentes se porestatem habere â—d dâ—mâ—â—aÌ„dum iam principibus fabricatoribus mundi huius S. â—ren lib. 1 c. 24 Gnosticos autem se vocant etiam imagines quasdam quidem depictas quasdam autem de reliqua materia fabricatas habent dicentes formam Christi factam à Pilato illo tempore quo fâ—i Iesus cum hominibus has coâ—onant proponunt eas cum imaginibus mundi Philosophorum videlicet cum imaginibus Pythagorae Platonis Aristotelis reliquorum reliquam obseruationem circa eas fimiliter vt Gentes faciunt Ibidem imâ—gâ—s that the Disciples of Basilices vsed inchantments and called on i. Vtuntur qui sunt à Basilide imaginibus incantationibus reliqua vniuersa paâ—erga nomina quoque quaedam affingentes quasi Angelorum annunciant hos quidem esse in primo coelo hos autem in secundo deinceps nituntur 365. ementitorum coelorum nomina principia Angelos virtutes exponere S. Iren l. 1. c. 23. The Church did not thus yet she honoured the good Spirits as by one of the same Age S. Iustine whoÌ„ you cited as a Protestant you may knowe He speakes in the name of Irenaeus and Polycarp and the whole Church of that time Sed illum Deum Patrem eius Filium qui venit nosque haec docuit aliorum sequentium similiumque bonorum Angelorum exercitum Spiritum Propheticum 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 colimus atque adoramus verboque re seu veritate veneramur idque omnibus qui discere volunt vt docti institutique sumus copiosè tradimus Apológ 2. ad Anton. Spirits but the Church not that there is no way to be saued but by beleeuing in Iesus Christ Neither is there saluation in any other for there is no name vnder heauen giuen amongst men whereby wee must be saued Acts 4. v. 12. Ergo he was a Protestant and would haue subscribed to the 39. Articles Melito putting downe the bookes of the old Testament saies l. The Scriptures themselues were not fullie receaued in all places no not in Eusebius his time He saith the Epistles of Iames of Iude the second of Peeter the second and third of Iohn are contradicted The Church of Syria did not receaue the second Epistle of of Peeter nor the second and third of Iohn nor the Epistle of Iude nor the Apocalyps The like might be said of the Churches of Arabia VVill you hence conclude that those parts of Scripture were not Apostolike or that wee need not receaue them because they were formerly doubted of Bilson in his Suruey pag. 664. See Couel against Burg. 87. seqq Tbe Protest Apol tract 2. c. 2 sect 10. subd 2. nothing k Simon dicebat secundum ipsius gratiam saluari homines sed non secundum operas iustas S. Iren. l.
speakes very obscurelie and sometymes placeth his words so that it is hard to discerne amongst them which to which is referd In the place alleadged he doth not referre those words id est figura Corporis mei to Corpus meum but to Hoc And the sence or meaning of them is This which once was an old figure of my bodie is now my bodie And when Master Doctour Smith said he could bring out of Tertullian himselfe in the same place foure reasons prouing this was Tertullians meaning and withall cited other wordes of Tertullian wherein he doth after the same manner disorder the composition of the wordes Master Featlie would not suffer him to bring those reasons neither did he say any thing to the places wherein Tertullian had in like sort inuerted the order of the words but onely said the order of the wordes alleadged was vnusuall and that it followes not they are heere disordered by this Author because he had done the like elsewhere Doctour Smith answeared that this kinde of confusion of wordes and difficultie in expounding himselfe was not vnusuall in a Tertullianus creber est in sentetijs sed difficilis in eloquendo S. Hieron loc cit Tertullian bringing instance thereof said withall that he did not inferre that Tertullian heere did speake so because he had done the like in other places but because he doth affoord in this very place foure seuerall reasons why he must be so vnderstoode whereof one he produced presently out of the words obiected For quoth he since Tertullian sayes that our Sauiour made breade his owne bodie he was not so forgetfull as immediately to adde that the Eucharist is a meere figure of his bodie This he seconded with another as that Tertullian presently after the foresaid wordes saith it had not beene a figure c. figura autem non fuisset by which wordes he shewes that he speakes of the figure which was before our Sauiour said hoc est corpus meum this is my bodie And the booke of Tertullian being brought he shewed a third reason out of other wordes ensuing Vt autem sanguinis veterem figuram in vino recognoscas aderit Esaias c. and that thou mayest acknowledge in the wine an old figure of blood Esaie c. Out of which wordes he proued that when Tertullian spake of breade he spake of an old figure because he saith of the wine plainely that it was an old figure of blood and connecting this his proofe videlicet that wine had beene an old figure of blood with the former of breade he saith vt autem sanguinis veterem c. VVhere the particles autem and show that in both he speakes of a like that is to say an old legall figure and that he meāt that both wine was an old figure of our Sauiours bloode and breade an old figure of his bodie Now if Tertullian speake as hath beene proued of an old legall figure it is certaine he could not referre the word figure to the attribute or praedicatum Corpus meum my bodie for our Sauiour did not say that the Eucharisticall breade was an old and legall figure of his bodie but onlie to the subiect He was readie to vrge also had D. Feat permitted that which immediately followes in the same place Cur autem panem Corpus suum appellat non magis peponem quem Marcion cordis loco habuit non intelligens veterem fuisse istam figuram Corporis Christi dicentis per Hieremiam aduersum me cogitauerunt cogitatum dicentes venite conijciamus lignum in panem eius scilicet crucem in corpus eius Itaque illuminator antiquitatum quid tunc voluerit significasse panem satis declarauit corpus suum vocans panem But why he calleth bread his bodie and not a pōpiō rather which Marcion had in place of a heart not vnderstanding that it was an old figure of the bodie of Christ saying by Ieremy they haue conspired against me saying come let vs cast wood on his bread to wit the crosse on his body The Illuminator therefore of antiquities hath declared sufficientlie what he would haue bread thē to haue signified calling his bodie bread In which wordes Tertullian speakes plainely of an old figure as appeares by veterem and tunc Moreouer Tertullian in all that booke proues that our Sauiour did fulfill diuers figures of the old Testament amongst others these of breade and wine which in the old lawe were figures of his bodie bloode Therefore whē he speakes of them of breade and wine as figures he speakes of old figures and so would not say that our Sauiour made breade to be a figure of his bodie for it is certaine that he did not make bread an old legall figure but that he made breade which was an old legall figure his bodie as Tertullian himselfe there speaketh In fine Master D. Smith tould Master Featley that of curtesie he would admitt the word figura figure to be referd to the word Corpus bodie that his argument might runne on and he make the best he could of it but the minister would not make vse of this his free offer And this was the issue of the first argumēt THE NOTES OF S. E. BY this discourse it doth appeare manifestly that Tertullian in the words obiected doth not oppose but approue our doctrine auouching a change in that which of old was a figure of our Sauiours bodie to wit bread into the same bodie our Sauiour by this meanes making it present in the shape of the figure which it doth fulfill and euen to the mouth and * Caro Corpore Christi vescitur De Resur carnis flesh according to the same author in another place Master Featleyes discourse of S. Cyprian calling Tertullian Master putts me in minde of some wordes after cited by my Lord in his answer to the 5. argument which the reader may take from one of the same age to let Antiquitie interprete Antiquitie as a further Comment vppon the meaning of Tertullian Serm. de Coena apud Cyp. Panis iste non effigie sed natura mutatus omnipotentia verbi factus est caro sicut in persona Christi humanitas apparebat latebat diuinitas ita Sacramento visibili ineffabiliter diuina se infundit essentia That bread being changed not in shape but in nature is by the omnipotence of the Word made flesh and as in the Person of Christ the humanitie did appeare and the diuinitie lie hid so heere a diuine essence doth vnspeakeablie poure it self into a visible Sacrament Behold a presence brought about by change of the Substance or nature of that which was before according to Scripture a figure into the flesh or bodie the exteriour shape of the figure breade remayning and containing in it the foresaid holy substance as in our Sauiour God who is inuisible is really in the shape of man Neither is our cause any thing hurt by the placing of
Vide Caiet Baun Nazar c. in 1. p. q. 52. a. 2. in two bodies at once though the bodies be distinct he still remaines the same Neither is he continued by the continuitie of bodies if those he moues suppose two drops of water become one A Spirit in extended things is not extended in continued things not continued in distinct things not distinguished He is in another order far aboue God is neither multiplied in himself by the great multitude of things wherein he is nor by their quantitie extended Were there at once many worlds he would be in them all Saint Augustine had an apprehension that the soule of Martyrs were perchance at once in diuers places Quanquam ista quaestio vires intelligentiae meae vincat quemadmodum opitulentur Martyres iis quos per eos certum est adiuuari Vtrum ipsi per seipsos assint vno tempore tam diuersis locis tanta inter se longinquitate discretis siue vbi sunt eorum memoriae siue praeter suas memorias vbicunque adesse senti untur an ipsis in loco suis meritis conguo ab omni mortaliuÌ„ conuersatione remotis c. Res haec altior est quà m vt à me possit attingi abstrusior quà m vt à me valeat persetutari ideo quid horum duorum sit an verò fortassis vtrumque sit c. S Augustin lib. de cura pro mort c. 16. vndistracted That it is the fault of men ouerhastie and vndiscreetlie rash to determine the supposition of the Pronowne Hoc before the Neither doth Hoc of it self determine that precise instant wherein it is vttered The thing demonstrated may follow that instant or moment when the proposition is speculatiue much more when it is practick and is cause of the thing signified Nomen Pronomen secundum Grammaticos non consignificat tempus sed Verbo id competit quare demonstratio per se Pronominis abstrahit a tempore scilicet quo prosertur Pronomen quo terminatur totius orationis prolatio saith Soto cited in the Censure p. 501. In the Relation of S. F. pag. 80. there is a place of Scripture brought to shew that the thing demoÌ„strated may follow the Pronoune Hoc Hoc est praeceptum meum vt c. There be diuers other examples of it in holie Scripture whereof some are noted also by your Chamier l. 10. de Euchar. c. 21. Et hoc vobis signum inuenietis infantem Luc. 2. Hoc scientes quod vetus homo Rom. 6. Hoc est pactum meum vt circumcidatur Gen. 17. Haec sunt nomina Ruben Simeon Exodi 1. And the Prophets otherwhile begin with Haec dicit Dominus He adds that sometimes Hoc and Hic demonstrate things past Hoc totum factum est Matth. 1. and sometimes that which the eie cannot at all perceaue Haec eo cogitante Mat. 1. Falsum est saies he c. 18. etiam in Pronomine aduerbioue demonstrandi requiri rem praesentem Non enim est perpetuuÌ„ and Omnia tam praesentia quam praeterita sensui sunt demonstrabilia quia in sensibus aures sunt quibus per verba nihil non demonstrari potest To which purpose he citeth S. Aug. l 2. de Doct. Christ c. 3. predicate be knowne it appeares by that I haue allready said about it If it be considered secundum se as it is before the rest is vttered it is indetermined and he must make a new Dictionarie that will haue it in that acception to signifie bread Or Hic in the other forme determinatlie and ex vi sua to signifie wine into which new Dictionarie should the same compilers put Haec for meate which it doth signifie as determinatlie of it self the yong Schollers in Hic Haec Hoc would haue a feast If Hoc doth not being taken secundum se determinatlie signifie bread as it is manifest it doth not then D. MortoÌ„s whole building without more adoe D. Vshers argumeÌ„ts for bread are answered by F. Mallon falls vnto the ground Yet least it should not easilie enough be ruined this way he doth another way himself vndetermine it whilst he brings in an Armie of Witnesses to force his Reader to beleeue that the Sacrament is consecrated by prayer benedictioÌ„ distinct from these words Hoc est c. which he saith be not words of inuocation and prayer but of declaration It is in the second Chapter of his first booke in his Challeng where he saith The Archbishop of Caesarea cometh in compassed about with a clowde of witnesses and reasons to proue that the consecration vsed by our Sauiour was performed by that blessing by prayer which preceded the pronouncing of those words Hoc est corpus meum Were this so the chiefest of his D. Mortons cauils which is about the supposition of of the word Hoc were cut of by it When the water at Cana was changed and wine standing vpon the table what cauill could then be raised against these words Hoc est vinum This is wine He thinks he gets the Cause if he caÌ„ out of the words of any of ours deduce the contrarie to the common tenet of the Church Which manner of disputing in him is notoriouslie If the Church-authoritie be ouerthrowne by authoritie it must be donne by a greater The authoritie of priuate men is far yea infinitelie lesse in regard of the Diuine Assistance which the Church by promise hath He shall teach you Ioan. 14. 16. It has seemed good to the Holie Ghost and to vs. Act. 15. insufficient The Writers themselues were still readie to retract whateuer could be found in their bookes any way repugnant vnto Church-doctrine they knew they might mistake and therefore submitted their writings opinions and iudgment to the iudgment and Censure of the Church which they beleeued to be secured from errour by the prouidence of the holy Ghost her Master Should a man in the Schooles of Deuinitie step vp and say The definitioÌ„ of the Councell of Trent approued by the Church is repugnant in consequence at least to the OpinioÌ„ of suppose Bellarmine Ergo the definition is false He would be thought either to deride the Cardinall or to want something which commonlie men haue This I saie in generall touching the manner and for the matter it is well knowne the Cardinall I meane the same of others was able to defend both Vniuersall tenets and his owne priuate Answers and opinions against a better Scholler then D. Morton Doctor Featlie as it appeares by his ArgumeÌ„t out of Tertullians words puts the figure in the word Corpus ConfereÌ„ce of Cathol and Prot. doct l. 1. c. 10. a 1. for he would haue the words to runne thus Hoc est figura corporis mei which is the opinion of Oecolampadius fauored also by Caluin And according to this way the words Hoc â—st corpus meum are thus interpreted Hoc this thing est is corpus meum the figure of my bodie
thus in his Iuie bush that you may sucke sacke from thence After this M. Waferer enters into the matter of transubstantiation which matter was not handled in the Conference He might haue saued himself the labour he takes and looseth in talking of it had he as he might and should haue obserued but that he was willing to confound Questions and runne out of one into another that which my Lord in the beginniâ—â— gaue the auditorie then present to vnderstand Confer pag. 7. See also Featli Pag. 288 That the Conference was to be not of Transubstantiation but of the reall presence onlie which by order of disputatioÌ„ ought to be first and so it was agreed and nothing said of that matter What he brings against it is ordinarie stuffe and the manner of deliuering it worse then ordinarie The authors which he cites are Caietan Scotus who notwithstanding as is well knowne to Schollers that are able to read their books do maintaine and defend and that Caiet 3. p. q 75. Scotus in 4. d. 10. 11. The words obiected against vs out of him to proue the doctrine of transsubstantiation to be new be these d. 11. qu. 3. where he speakes of the Lateran Councell Quicquid ibi in Concilio Lateranensi dicitur esse eredendum tenendum est esse de substantia fidei hoc post illam declarationem factam ab Ecclesia Et si quaeras quare voluit Ecclesia eligeâ—e istum intellectum ita difficilem huius articuli cum verba scripturae possent saluati secundum intellectum facilem veriorem secundum apparentiam de hoc articulo Dico quod eo Spiritu expositae sunt Scripturae quo conditae Et ita supponendum est quod Ecclesia Catholica eo Spiritu exposuit quo tradita est nobis fides spiritu scilicet veritatis edocta ideo hunc intellectum elegit quia verus est Non enim in potestate Ecclesiae fuit facere istud verum vel non verum sed Dei instituentis sed intellectum a Deo traditum Ecclesia explicauit directa in hoc vt creditur Spiritu veritatis He that well considers these words will easilie perceaue there is in them no occasion giueÌ„ to pretend that he denies the doctrine to be auncient since he affirmes it to be contained in the Scripture that the Church by directioÌ„ of the Holy Ghost whose assistance the Catholicks beleeue found it there Eo Spiritu expositae sunt Scripturae c ideo hunc sensum elegit quia you will not I hope accuse the Scripture of noueltie See Saint Augustine Contra Epist fundam c. 4. Epist 118. de bapt l. 2. c. 4. 9. l. 5. c. 17. Contra Crescon Gram. l 1. c. 33 Scripturarum in hac re tenetur veritas cum hoc facimus quod vniuersae iam placuit Ecclesie c. It is the Church that is to teach vs the meaning of the Scripture docete and the holy Ghost directs her in it docebit vos larglie and professedlie both the Realâ— preseÌ„ce which was the matter of the Conference 〈◊〉 transubstantiatioÌ„ which matter he would faine runne into to make a further demonstration of his ignorance and vnsufficiencie Next he saies the churches of Asia and the Greeke churches dissented that is denied transubstantiation He might aswell haue tould his Reader that wee do they hauing as fullie declared them selues in their Profession bookes and Councels And that verie Councell of Florence wheÌ„ce he would against the whole streame of authoritie make good his rash assertion in the Instruction of faith giuen to the Armenians which was made in publick session sacro approbante concilio that verie yeere he speakes of 1439. doth ackowledge it in these wordes Ipsorum verborum virtute substantia panis in corpus Christi substantia vini in sanguinem conuertitur ita tamen vt totus Christus continetur sub specie panis totus sub specie vini sub qualibet quoque parte hostiae consecratae vini consecrati separatione facta totus est Christus by vertue of those verie words of consecration the substance of bread is turned into the bodie and the substance of wine into the blood yet so that whole Christ is contained vnder the species of bread and whole vnder the species of wine and also whole Christ is vnder euery part of the consecrated hoast and consecrated wine when there is a separation or diuision made See Cardinall Peron his booke against P. Mornay pag. 812. sâ—qq and Censu Eccles Orient Respons 1. ad German c. 13. Responso 2. c. 4. He saies pag. 47. and most ignorantlie that the Churches tenet of a substantiall change vnder the species which change wee call transubstantiation was a thing not knowne or taught for 1215. yeeres after Christ which is a lie many times confuted by our Deuines Bellarmine Peron Allen Gualterius and others yea and by your owne too Master Mirth your owne men Protestants confesse that Damascen taught it that Gregorie and Austine brought it into England that it entred early into the Church Cited in the Protest Ap. tract r. sect 7. subd 4. See also sect 2. subd 2. Reade the discourse of M. Brierley p. 184. Least you should outface such as want bookes some few of those which held the change shall for their sakes be represented on the by I told you that Protestants coÌ„tradict your assertion and your frind Crakâ—â—thorps also Birkberks learned kinsman whoÌ„ you cite in your margine But I come neerer pag. 232. this your Doctors frind Birckbeck will admit and with his aduise that it was publiklie taught in England by Lancfranc long before the time you speake of So will I come neerer yet Master Waferer of Alban-Hall and with the same Doctors approbat Who saith pag. 48. so soone he forgot himself your transubstantiation is no better then the coynage of the monk Damascen who liued anno 730. This I note by the way only to shew your ignorance and temeritie in your assertions and how little your word is to be regarded The point it self I do not heare examine because I will not leaue the matter of the Conference as you striue to do Non de nomine Quaestio est sed de re substantiarum nempe distinctarum ordine sub iisdem accidentibus sub quibus ante consecrationem sit natura vel substantia panis post consecrationem verum D. N. corpus Celebratum est Lateran ense Concilium saeculo 13. In ore duoâ—um vel trium testium stabit omne verbum Matth. 18. Seculo 12. Petrus Blesensis Epist 140. Pane vino transubstantiatis virtute verborum coelestrum in corpus sanguinem Christi accidentia quae priús ibi fuerant fine subiecto remanent apparent Petrus Lombard 4. d. 11 Post consecrationem non est ibi substanitia panis vel vini licet species remaneant est enim ibi species panis
two lines out of the former almost two lines of the later least I be forced abruptlie to break him of I beginne as he doth with the Synopsis of the matter Apologist This Section refutes their construction of those words The cup is the new testament in my blood Censure One Apologist Shewes that there is no substantiall change wrought by them Censure Two Apologist That there is not identitie materiall he meanes in them vzt of the blood and the thing whereinto the wine is changed Censure Three So farre the Synopsis Now the Discourse Apologist By vertue of the words This is my blood of the new Testament This cup is the new TestameÌ„t in my blood He who will first conclude a substantiall change and then consequentlie He will presume identitie in them but both vntrulie Censure Four And yet there is fauour too For first in the text out oâ— which S. E. if you meane him defends and auouches the Reall presence of the blood there is more then you cite he insisteth on words by you omitted Your Doctour had obiected that no substaÌ„tiall part of any testatour could be properlie his testameÌ„t in that seÌ„ce wherein my Lord heer tooke the words S. E. answers that this assertion of you Doctour is contrarie to the Gospell which importes as much as this This drink in forme of wine is my testament which drinke is shed for you hence he doth auouch If shed for vs it was blood blood a testament and blood is â— part The text he cites is in Saint Luke whither he refers you to reade the wordes of our Sauiour which be theâ— This the Chalice the new testament in my blood which it shed for manie vnto remission of sinnes Secondlie in that you he the chang of wine into blood the identitie of blood with the thing â—nto which wine is changed be not â—â—ulie auouched out of the text you â—peak at one time two vntruthes Apologist I will distinctlie giue answere to this confused Section Censure Let this passe without a Note though the Discourse in the â—ection as he cals it be distinct and â—leere not confused and this Apologist so farre froÌ„ giuing a distinct answer that he doth not answer Apologist Doctor Smith and his Second admit what vpon further try all they denie a figure in those wordes of the â—up Censure Fiue Apologist Aske them how they vnderstand these words this cup is the new testament and they replie properlie enough What then is the new Testament it cannot be denied but that it is the last and eternall will of Christ the testatour c. now how a cup which is no other theâ— the work of an artificer can be saiâ— properlie to be this let who will iudge Censure Six They do not saie that the artificiall cup is either the interiour will or the authentick signe of it as he who will iudge may see pag. 100. seqq Apologist But they proceede to affirme it the cup which is no other then the worke of an artificer properlie to be called a Testament because saie they it is an authenticall signe of his will Censure Seauen Iudge now Courteous Reader whether this be a man to write books anâ— teach Diuinitie I will not saie he is either witles or willfullie malicious tâ— vent such things in print the bookâ— being yet extant which he doth thuâ— impugne but the learnedst freind hâ— hath will as easilie maintaine thaâ— black is white as defend his innocencie vnles for I will not think him to be as he termes S. E. cup-hardie as he was an infant by his Relation at the time of the Conference so yet he bee indeed an Innocent I haue gonne ouer but six and thirtie lines all lying together or lying alltogether and allreadie repent me of the losse not of my labour for without labour I found what I lookt for but of time Should a man runne ouer all your booke in this manner Master Waferer he would finde this nastie Centon made to couer your needie cause as full of lyes as a slouenlie beggars breech is full of though you pretend to be a sworne enimie to that vice and so farre that because equiuocation doth seeme to resemble it soÌ„what you bitterlie declaime against equiuocation too and challenge more credit to your bare affirmation theÌ„â— Catholike is able to deserue sending vs this insinuation publikelie by the print Let me tell you a Protestant hath more reason to be beleeued on his bare word VVafer pag. 97. then a Papist because the Protestants religion ties him to speake the truth from his heart without any mentall reseruation but the Papists doctrine teacheth him a pretie kind of deceipt called equiuocation and will not stick to license the loudest lie so it be aduantagiouâ— to the cause of Rome And he too Saint Ierome saies to me seemes an Hypocrite who saith vnto his brother staie let me take a motâ— out of thine eie Our Sauiour himselâ— stiles him so Hypocrite first cast thâ— beame out of thine owne You tell thâ— Church of Rome there is in heâ— doctrine a prettie kind of deceit called equiuocation which you arâ— offering nicelie to take out anâ— cannot see the monstrous lies thaâ— lie in your owne booke to whicâ— for they come out of your moutâ— vpon the paper as thick as waspâ— out of a nest whilst you are speâ—king of a prettie deceit which yoâ— your self impose you adde an other in your book that the Papists doctrine will not stick to licence the loudest lie But who licencied your Book Master Waferer whose approbat had you to it I should haâ—e thought none but the Father â—ies would haue liked it it is â—o enormouslie peccant against faith and good manners so full of â—ies in matters of both kinds had I not heard six monthes â—nd more before the printer maâ—e it a coate where the babe was â—t nurse with other circumstances which are knowne to Mistrisse Featâ—ie The seuenth Argument was taken out of that place of S. Mathew where the cup our Sauiour drank of is called the fruit of the vine It was answered that there were two cups the Legall and the Sacramentall and that those wordes as appeares by by the relation of Saint Luke were meant of the Legall cup though it had beene easie to answer the Argument had theâ— beene vnderstood of the Sacrâ—mentall M. Featlie would haue the word spoken of the sacramentall cup a. These words in S. Matt. This fruite of the vine must haue relation 〈◊〉 the Cup of which S. Matt. spake before But S. Matt spake of no Cup before but the cup of the new Testament therefore c. Featlie Relat. pag 302. oâ—lie of no other cup then that of the new Testament And he had his Answer Now Waferer seeing it proued in the Relation that they were spokeÌ„ of the Legall cup and Featlies Arguments being impertinent vnles they be spoken of the Sacramentall saies that Christ spake them vndoubtedlie of
brought were Clemens Cyprian Chrysostome The Author de dogmatibus vnder the name of S. Augustine the Councell of wormes and Innocent the third These were all and S.E. tooke notice of and answered to them all and without adding any more as he may know who will turne vnto the place which is pag. 114. That Christ said of the coÌ„secrated cup it was the fruite of the vine you find not in his Notes though he tels you the Argument might haue beene answered if our Sauiour had said so See p. 108. 117. Your replie videlicet He is called a vine who was none substantiallie so wine is also called blood which was not so substantiallie is a begging of the Question if you meane that your so doth import the same manner and ridiculous if you intend to haue the later part an illatioÌ„ from the former The thinge in the Chalice was the price of our RedemptioÌ„ it was shed for the remission of sinnes could this be wine substantiallie Vide S. Chrys Hom. 24. in Pri. Cor or in proprietie And if in your forme I said thus S. Iohn is called an eagle who was none none substaÌ„tiallie so also Waferers Fathers was called a maÌ„ who was not so substaÌ„tiallie would you approue of the discourse t' is iust as yours But now you come to your Postlegomena where you recon vp your Doctors great exploites Whole men belike he hath diuided at a blow Secuit Lucilius Vrbem Te Te Apol. What this booke speakes of Doctour Featlie who will regaâ—d since it contrarily appeares to the world and can yet be iustified to the doubtfull by witnesses now liuing that he often discouered yôur Fishers hookes and tooke him with his owne angle he hath euer beene Musket proofe he allwaise put Sweetes mouth of relish Egle-stones simples could not work with him How vnlikelie then is this report that Smith could ouerbeare him Censure Ad populum phaleras Wee knowe the man you speake of In the Vniuersitie there was an other opinion of him and that which hath publiklie appeared since euen in those pieces you commend him for doth confirme it Did he but see the Character of himself which a Scholler drew out of the first of those you name he would be sorrie that he euer put it out By one that was present I haue heard too what he said at home in his owne howse touching the Catalogue then demaunded A frinde of his Birckbeck in his Catalogue hath endeuoured since to draw a skinne ouer the soare but in vaine So many seuerall Religions as he names all those men which he puts downe could neuer be contained in one Communion The Wickleffists Hussites Waldenses Lollards the Deuines that wrot against them the Councels that condemned them for Hereticks were not of one minde all were they Lateran CoÌ„staÌ„ce Yet do you acknowledge those Hereticks your Predecessors and put the Deuines and CouÌ„cels into your Catalogue Your taske had been to haue attoned them making it first appeare they were of one Religion all and then after to haue proued by good Euidence that this one was the Protestant and no other To vnite those Heresies but now specified amongst themselues and with Protestants will be another ten yeeres work for this Collectour atque idem iungat vulpes after which he may spend twentie more to reconcile the whole multitude of all sorts which he puts in and then when Est non est be all one the wound may be drawne vp He names Fathers and Councelâ— too who knowes not that Hereticks laie claime vnto the first Disciples and Apostles that they challenâ— the Scripture to themselues anâ— would draw God such is their arrogancie to their side obtruding theiâ— errours for his word whereas they contradict him flatlie as hath appeared in the tryall and by men of hiâ— owne side more learned then himself hath beene confessed It hath beene confessed I say that in many great matters the Fathers the Auncients all the Fathers all from the Apostles time the Fathers with mutuall consent all Antiquitie the auncient Church the Church of the first fiue or six-hundred yeeres the Church in the very beginning generall Councells all Generall Councells are opposite to them This he may see proued out of their owne bookes in the Conference of Catholike and a. li. 2 c. 22. Protestant Doctrine and in the Protestants b. Tract 1. Sect. 3. Apologie there is instance made in diuers particular points Neither were it hard for any vnderstanding man that knowes well the true State of the Controuersies betwixt vs and Protestants to make this Euidentist confesse that no generall Councell no Father at all would euer haue subscribed to the booke of his ConfessioÌ„ the 39. Articles If you looke into him to see how he proues that any one of the Auncients held their tenets all as they are expressed in the 39. Articles you loose your labour he doth not though this were the thing demauÌ„ded as much as vndertake it Vnles this be perchaÌ„ce a demonstratioÌ„ of the thing suppose I take your †In the first he puts the Apostles Dixit facta suÌ„t second Age Iustine saies that as vpon c. Alimentum hoc eucharistizatus panis vinum appellatur apud nos Eucharistia quod nulli alij participare licitum est quà m veram esse nostram doctrinam credenti lauachro propter remissionem peccatorum regenerationem abluto ita vt Christus tradidit viu enti Non enim vt coÌ„munem panem neque communem potum ista sumimus sed quemadmodum per verbum Dei caro factus est Christus Seruator noster carnem sanguinem salutis nostrae causa habuit sic etiam per preces Verbi Dei ab ipso Eucharistiam factam cibum ex quo sanguis caro nostra per mutationem aluntur incarnati illius Iesu carnem sanguinem esse edocti sumus Nam Apostoli in commentariis à se scriptis quae Euangelia vocantur ita tradiderunt praecepisse sibi Iesum Eum enim pane accepto cùm gratias egisset dixisse Hoc facite in meam commemorationem Hoc est corpus meum Et poculo similiter accepto gratiis actis dixisse Hic est sanguis meus Iustin. Apol 2 ad Antonin Vide Bellar. li 2. de Euchar. c. 4. vbi dicit illa verba Ex quo sanguis caro nostra per mutationem aluntur esse periphrasim panis ex quo conficitur Eucharistia vt sit sensus Panis vel cibus ex quo carnes nostrae ali solent cum praece mystica consecratur fit corpus Christi Gods dixit the Word became man so vpoÌ„ our Sauiours dixit bread became flesh or water wine That the Sacrament whose materia transiens is bread such as men eate is the flesh and blood of Christ and That Christ commauÌ„ded this Birckbeck knowes not what Ergo he was a Protestant and would haue subscribed to the 39. Articles Pope
1. c 20. of Iudith c. Ergo he was à Protestant and would haue subscribed to the 39. Articles See Gretser his defence of Bellarm de verbo Dei Clemens Alexandrinus saies our Lord †Vinum benedixit cum dixit Accipite c. l. 2. Paedag c. 2. Sanguis vitis verbum quod pro multis effunditur in remissionem peccatorum sanctum laetitiae fluentum allegoriâ—â— significat Ibidem blessed not beare but m. The same would Elfrick saie touching the other kind when he tells you there is much difference betwixt the bodie Christ suffered in and the bodie that is hallowed to how sell That which the Priest consecrateth and that which our Sauiour tooke was bread and there is great difference betwixt bread and a mans bodie But after consecration he tells you In that holy housell there is one thing in it seene and another not seene but vnderstood that which is there seene hath bodilie shape and that wee do there vnderstand hath ghostlie might The housell is dealed into sundrie parts chewed betweene teeth and sent into the bellie Howbeit neuerthelesse after ghostlie might it is all in euerie part See aboue pag. 330. the testimonie of Stephanus Eduensis about whose time this Elfrick is by the Protestants said to haue liued and of Lanfranck Archbishop of Canturburie who liued soone after and tells what was the beleefe of England and of the world in this point at that time vt vere dici possit ipsum corpus quod de Virgine sumptum est nos sumere non ipsum ipsum quidem quantum ad essentiam c. hanc fidem tenuit a priscis temporibus nunc tenet Ecclesia quae per totum orbem c. Suprà pag. 331. wine that he had learned to walke vpon earth not absolutely and for it self to n. Relatiue honour in due circumstances he denies not Put of thy shoes for the place wheron thou standest is holie ground Exod. 3 The Israelites were commaunded to bow before the Arck which had in it two Cherubins made of gold Adore his footestoole because it is holie Psalme 98 And they did so Venerabantur quondam Iudaei Sancta Sanctorum quia erant ibi Cherubim propitiatorium c S. Hieron Epist ad Marcell Marke that Quia The Prophets their directors knew the meaning of Adorate scabellum and Non facies tibi sculptile better I trowe then Iohn Caluin As for Clemens Alex. the learned know that his discourse in the booke obiected is against the Pagan Idolatrie Cur o stolidâ— he speakes to the Heathens inanium rerum dediti cogitationi coelestem locum maledictis incessentes pietatem ac religionem in soâ—â—m detraxistis Terrestres Deos Mercurium Iouem c. vobis fingentes haec gâ—nita ante Deum ingeniâ—um persequentes in profundiorem incidistis caligineÌ„ Pulcher est lapis Parius sed nondum est Neptunus Pulchrum est ebur sed nondum est Olympius Materia semper arte indiget Deus autem nullius indigus Cleâ—ens Alex. in Protrept siue Orat. adhort ad Gentes Ego â—utem terram those Idols made of gold or other preâ—ious matter were originallie of earth and therefore â—e calls them so calcare didici non adorare non enim â—â—hi fas vnquaÌ„ rebus inanimatis credere spes animae Ibidem Mercurium tanquam ianitorem c. si tanquam â—nsensibiles eos iniuria afficiunt cur adorant vt Deos Romani auteÌ„ qui res maximas praeclarè gestas Forâ—onae attribuunt eam esse Deam maximam existiâ—ant posuerunt eam in sterquilinio dignum Deae templum secessum tribuentes Ibidem â—â—pridius whose words are vsed to proue ChristiaÌ„ Churches had no pictures in theÌ„ speakes of Idols Alexander â—mperator Christo templum facere voluit eumque inter Deos recipere quod Adrianus cogitassé fertur qui templa in omnibus ciuitatibus sine simulachris iusâ—etat fieri quae hodie id circo quia non habent Numina dicuntur Adriani c. Lamprid. 〈◊〉 Alexand worship it Ergo he was a Protestant and would haue subscribed to the 39. Articles The Church of Smnirna could not be â—nduced to leaue Christ and worship any other for him and they did o 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 looke your Dictionarie great Rabbin And read againe S. Iustins words suprà pag. 546. honour his honourers Ergo they were Protestants and would haue subscribed to the 39. Articles Polycarp when he gaue thankes to God for calling him to Martyrdome did not inuocate the Saincts Ergo he was a Protestant and would haue subscribed to the 39. Articles Hegesippus liued in this second age he was of the Iewish Nation and was afterwards conuerted to Christianitie Ergo he was a Protestant and would haue subscribed to the 39. Articles These are the men all that he names in the †In the first Age he names Christ and his Apostles which is a begging of the Question Vide Collationem doct Cathol aâ— Protest cum expressis S. Scripturae verbis Parisiiis anno 1622. Adding two more S Denis citing his book ex quâ— Pontificij mâ—lle petunt testimonia saies Cook and S Ignatius in whose few Epistles be many testimonies against Protestants whereof â—ome haue beene obiected to Featlie vpon the like Challeng by D. VVeston second age Birckbeck In the second age from 100. to 200. Iustine the Martyr Hegesippus The Church of Smyrna touching the Martyrdome of their Bishop Polycarp Melito Bishop of Sardis Pope Eleutherius his Epistle to Lucius the first Christian king of Britaiâ—e Polycrates of Ephesus and the Easterne Churches touching the keeping of Easter â—â—enaeus Bishop of Lions Clemens Alexâ—ndrinus These I saie be men which he brings and I haue brieflie pointed at â—is proofe running it as I did suddainlie ouer for though he were long â—n making I do not think the booke worth serious reading If any of his Parish thinke the forsaid Arguments â—e good I pittie them Sapientia priâ—a est stultitia caruisse Some there will see by this little â—ight how easilie his pretence may be â—ut of by the neck The head of it is his claime to our Sauiour and his Apoâ—â—les whose words in Scripture you thinke and would force vs to beâ—eeue be Protestantish Whereas the â—earned on both sides know the Scripture and consequentlie the Writers and Authors of it to be for vs so dâ—rectlie that Protestants refuse to staÌ„â— vnto the proper sence An experiencâ— whereof the Reader hath seene in thâ— Question here discussed whereiâ— Scripture is for Catholikes so manâ—fest that our Aduersaries themseluâ—â— confesse Suprà pag. 293 they must yeild vs the caâ—se if it be taken 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 properlie The trunc of a mans bodie beinâ— deuoid of life and soule that contaâ—nes and holds all together quicklâ— resolues rendring to each element hâ—â— owne share The imagination is nâ—â— sooner quiet but the Chimera whicâ— it had made vp of
meane with M. Sweete where I finde an Embleme of that within your head the Vertigo Long agoe the Caluinists were on the h. Becanus le Circulo Caluinistilo Forme is not in matter if the disposition faile or if the prime cause doth not concurre wheele The Catholickes feare it not He that beleeues the Scripture for the Church and the Church for the Scripture if the resolue into them diuerslie windes not in a circle The diuine authoritie auouching the booke MotiuuÌ„ principale MotiuuÌ„ subordinatum may be the formall motiue inclining a man to beleeue both the bookes and the Church and the proposition of the Church may dispose his vnderstanding to beleeue that the bookes called Scripture the Apocalyps for example and the Epistle of Saint Iude are auouched by diuine authoritie He that said i. S Aug con Epist Fundam c. 5. In locum traditoris Christi qui successerit in Apostolorum actibus legimus cui libro necesse est me credere si credo Euangelio quoniam vtramque scriptutam similiter mihi Catholica commendat Authoritas Ibidem Vide eundem li. 2 de Doct. Christiana c 8. Ego veró Euangelio non crederem nisi me Catholicae Ecclesiae commoueret Authoritas did not exclude diuine Authoritie but principallie resolued into it though the same act depended as he professeth on Church-authoritie withall When the words are examined you will finde them to be of full waight non crederem †Apocalypsi non crederem nisi me Catholicae Ecclesiae eommoueret authoritas Infantes baptizari posseâ— debere non crederem nisi me Cath. Eccl. commouereâ— authoritas Baptizatos ab Haereticis non esse rebaptizandos non crederem nisi me C. Eccl. com authoritas Are you moued without it nisi and commoâ—eret authoritas Ecclesiae and that Catholicae too The fourth is his Conference with M. Egleston who did as Featlie relates vndertake to prooue against him that for an Accident quantitie to be supernaturally conserued without a subiect is no contradiction Is there any Will it be true QuaÌ„titas est and Quantitas non est It requires naturallie a subiect true but it self is not the subiect and some thing may supernaturallie haue lesse then it doth naturallie k. A man cannot be without auâ—nal because it is within his essence The subiect is not so within the essence of an acâ—idenâ— Some things are defined simpliciter some per additamentum See Arist in 7. Met. c. 3. ibidem S Tho. require as well as others haue supernaturallie more then they naturallie do require Our Sauiours humanitie hath not the subsistence which were naturall vnto it but another It subsisteth in the Word Doctour Eglestons Argument as it appeares by Featlie was grounded in this that God could supplie the action of the second cause Whereunto your Doctour answered that it was true in genere causae efficientis In Featlies Relatâ—ons pag. 132. non in genere sustentantis this was his distinction It was replied that sustentatio was actio and omnis actio est causae efficientis Your Doctour answered Omnis actio non est causae efficientis adding that there be three other causes haue also their action I cite the words of his owne Relation and concurre †A verâ—all shift vnworthie of a Doctor in the triall of a point of faith actiuelie to their effect and his first instance is in matter Staie Doctour What matter potentia passiua pure passiua doth that concurre actiuè is it an agent hath it actiuitie Is this doctrine currant now in our English Vniuersities I do not think it Sure I am that it escaped the Peripateticks whose slownes could not apprehend it Their bookes must be mended for passiue is actiue it had beene a matter lamentable to haue said this in the Grammar Schoole as well actiue may be passiue The efficient vnde motus as such may be mobile the subiect because the subiect now is vnde motus the efficient This is one of the Doctours Victories which he hath Chronicled himself wherein I must needs say he proceedes consequenter For where suffering is doing vinci there is vincere The efficient doth agere by it's forme and is moued to but in another kind by the finis whereupon there might be found a reason to extend the word motion to their causalitie But to call the causalitie of matter by that name or by the name of a Physicall action Grammaticalis makes not to this purpose the Disputant neuer meaÌ„t it knowing it to be impertineÌ„t is a meere abuse of words Materia non est principium actionis sed se habet vt subiectum recipiens actionis effectum Finis vero Agens Forma se habent vt actionis principium sed ordine quodam Nam primum quidem principium actionis est Finis qui mouet agentem Secundo verò Agent Tertio autem Forma eius quod ab agente applicatur ad agendum Quamâ—os ipsum agens performam suam agat vt patet in artificialibus Artisex enim mouetur ad agendum a Fine C.S. Tho. 1. p q 105. a. 5. After this last Answer giuen by Doctour Featlie they be the Doctors owne words in the verie words aboue written or to the like effect Featlie p. 133. Doctour Egleston notwithstanding his former great vaunt Of this disputatioÌ„ with M Wood see aboue pag. 468. was content to giue ouer his Argument the companie intreated Doctour Featlie to oppose M. Wood c. Thus the Chronicler of his owne proclaimed triumph for which your lines adore him These Conferences are all in that volume That which S. E. lookt on is not there but in another booke called the Sacriledge wherein the Doctour would seeme to haue begunne his Catalogue in one point by naming men in euerie Age that did acknowledge and auouch a Diuine precept obliging the Laietie to both kinds to be coÌ„tained in those words of Scripture which the Protestants do cite for that purpose I said he would seeme to do it for he that reades the booke will finde no such a. Metaque feruâ—dis euitata rotis matter as he pretendes And yet had he donne it this had beene he knowes far from exhibiting that which was harangued for or performing the taske wherein he was engaged which was to produce and make good a Catalogue of Protestant beleeuers in all points and all ages Notwithstanding hauing made a noise he begins as if Hercules labours had beene laboured ouer againe to shake his knottie club and after a publike challeng solemnlie proclaimed and in bitter termes against M. Fisher as In his challeÌ„g pag 252. his leaden treatise his ragged stile his white liuer his Midas Reader his collapsed Ladies the distracted braines of the penner c. he casts him of contemptiblie to come into the Relation of his Encounter with my Lord. Mouet ecce †Sophisticen tridentem Postquam vibrata
pendentia RETIA dextra Nequicquam effudit nudum ad spectacula vultum Erigit tota fugit agnoscendus arena This is all Master Waferer I finde no more Victories in your booke yet one more he might get you think if to help you who hetherto haue endeuoured to helpe him he set on me But the meaner Scholler I am the greater he conceaues himself to be the lesse I neede to feare Genuinum fregit in illis Bigger are but butterflies in his esteeme and eagles you know catch not after flies In tauros Libyci ruunt leones Ne sint papilionibus molesti This motto he made to be inscribed in his Escocheon in the place where he tooke leaue of other Aduersaries to come to fight the combat which wee talke of You and I at most be but Seconds and if I be no better theÌ„ you verie poore ones Such as a Scholler without arrogancie may think no great honour to ouermatch If twentie yeere ago he were a match as you pretend for D. Smith the now Bishop of Chalcedon hath laboured and exercised himself in Controuersies euer since for him now to crush me were no conquest I am not I confesse more able then S. E. who did answer VVaferers Elogium of S. E his Notes which are aboue p. 9. seq you say but stammering lies so poorelie as not worth confutation his sophistrie is slender and boyish The ABC of Logick may teach him And would you haue your Doctour your Champion so much aboue S. E. to come and with his hoast of Paralogismes in your armour least he be knowne to set on me Egregiam vero laudem spolia ampla Yet howeuer it happen know this Master Waferer Statuam quam erexisti non adoramus I honour the truth I beleeue the Sonne of God I am a Catholike so assured of the diuine prouidence directing his Church that he who doth oppose it shall neuer be my Oracle Your censer shall not come into my hand though my Censure come into your Doctours and be perchance torne by it Apologist Sensere quid mens rite quid indoles Nutrita faustis sub penetralibus Posset Censure Nouimus expertis crede QVANTVS In clypeum assurgat quo turbine torqueat hastam Occidit óccidit Spes omnis Fortuna nostri Nominis Fuimus * Is the Barchelour a Brittan Troes fuit Ilium Apologist How vnlike then is this report that Smith could ouerbeare him If surelie he had no other tooles then these wherewith to quitte himself of those blowes were giuen him no question but he was soundlie hammered And whereas his Lordships Chaplaine seekes to salue vp the matter with this afterclap the Relation those which but ouerlooke it must needes confesse it hath donne him this second iniurie to publish his weaknes Censure Smith and toole and hammered quaÌ„ frigid Was it so soone out of your mind that an impenetrable adamant suffereth nothing VVaf p. 94. whilst the hand which offereth it violence is disabled with it's owne blow This it is when a man hath the luck to light otherwile on a good metaphore but hath not wit enough to see where to put it Things come into your imagination as images thorough a little hole into a dark roome where men are seene walking with their heeles vpward To rectifie them arte is necessarie there and reflexion heere which if the Reader vse he will finde my Lorde aboue and your Doctor vnder in the combat And these two Writings of S. E. and the Bachelour that speaks to you to be so farre from discouering any weaknes that had our pens beene answerable to his worth this booke might remaine to posteritie a liuing monument of his successe in the Dispute But this our paines to him was not needfull himself thereby did prouide vnto himself a fairer in the soule of M. Kneuet who taking light and conceauing life in the Conference and â—ince dead in peace is engaged now to thanke him in eternitie Apologist Doctor Featlies able seruice to Gods Church is farre to eminent to be eclipsed by anie Doway Satyre Censure In these times when Mirth writes Diuinitie I may saie as the Satyrist did Difficile est Satyram non scribere though the Readers will finde the booke of S. E. to be farre from that nature Whilst you talke heere of your Doctours seruice to eminent to be eclipsed you bring againe into our mind how partiallie not to saie absurdlie you exalt him so high as to thinke his excellencie appeares vnto the world and how irreligiouslie you haue incensed so many lines all in this Pamphlet to the Chimera of his opinion which you think sits in Maiestie within the clowdes Caput inter nuhila condit See aboue pag 448 and pag. 120. Apologist The Papists doctrine teacheth a prittie kind of deceit called equiuocation Censure That which is properlie equiuocation hath for it the authoritie of God and man No booke I do not excepte Scripture but hath it One thing there is which some think is others think is not indeed equiuocation that I meane which you glaunce at when you speake of mentall reseruation which howeuer it may haue priuate abbetters as other opinions haue is no tenet of the Church But answer me one Question Master Waferer He that should saie this is my bodie when he meant onlie that it was the figure of his bodie should he not equiuocate And if a world of sincere people taking his words plainlie as they come without explication from his mouth should be deceaued by this equiuocation what would be thought of it Reflect vpon the matter well The lie which you adde to this your Censure of equiuouocation is censured els-where it is this that the Papists Doctrine will not stick to license the lowdest lie so it be aduantagious to the cause of Rome Apologist Supra pag. 526 There haue beene those impudent pens which durst traduce the most eminent patternes of Christianitie and affirme that worthie Bâ—za and Doctor King recanted their Religion with their last breath Censure If they did the better it was for them Whether M. Whether M.T. B. reconciled Doctor King as I haue heard or did not imports not our cause Lupus the prouerb saies pilum mutat non mentem As for Beza what a patterne of Christianitie he was being a Protestant this white paper will not haue me paint vpon it Some thing of him of the rest of your great patternes out of Protestant Authours you may reade in Master a. Protestants Apologie At their names in the Index you haue direction to the places See also Luthers life c. with a further discourse touching Melancthon Bâ—cer Beza c. By the same Author printed at â— Omeâ—â— anno 1624 Brierleys booke and more might easilie be added fowler then the inke that were to characterize it if men were disposed to drawe them to the life Such goblins you should see walking at once did the print conspire in