of the Decalogue 2. Athanasius in bis Synopsis cap. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 This Book of Exodus containeth the Sâ—…atutes or Judgements and before them all the Ten Commandements in two Tables whereof this was the first I am the Lord thy God c. This the second Thou shalt not make to thy self any graven image 3. Greg. Naz. in his verses which have this title 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Ten Commandements of Moses sets this for the first Commandement 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Thou shalt not know any other God and this for the second 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Thou shalt not make any vain or breathless image I could moreover add Saint Chrysostom and Epiphanius and others but this was never at all a doubt much less a Controversie in the Greek Church Therefore I make haste to the Latines where I will not insist upon Saint Hierom because we had his testimony already in Sedulius but only Saint Ambrose who in his Comment upon the sixth of the Ephesians saith expresty This is the first Commandemâ—…nt Thou shalt have no other Gods but me and this the second Thou shalt not make to thy self any image or likeness This is enough to shew the doctrine of the Latine Church whereof Saint Hierom and Saint Ambrose were accounted the two first and chiefest Doctors yet to these I will add Severus Sulpitius who in the first Book of his holy History hath these words Nos eam sc. legem Dei breviter perstringemus Non erunt inquit tibi alii Dii praeter me Non facies tibi Idolum Non sumes nomen Dei tui in vanum Sabbathis nullum opus facies c. I will briefly set down the Law of God Thou shalt have no other Gods but me Thou shalt not make to thy self an image or idol Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain Thou shalt do no work on the Sabbath daies c. This man undertaking to set down the Decalogue sets down those four Commandements distinctly as belonging to the first Table And though the Schoolmen in process of time had generally followed Saint Augustine joyning the first and second Commandements in one yet the other Divines had not generally followed the Schoolmen till of very late years if we may believe Polydore Virgil an Author that writ in the daies of our King Henery the eight For in his fifth Book de Invent. rerum and ninth Chapter he hath these remarkable words Si vis ad vitam ingredi serva mandata quorum capita haec sunt Unum Deum colito Nullius animalis effigiem colito Per Dei nomen haud frustra dejerabis Festos dies piè riâ—…è celebrato Parentes venerare Hominem ne occideris Adulterium fuge Furtum non feceris Nihil alienum concupiveris nec falsum dix eris testimonium If thou wilt enter into life keep the Commandements the Heads whereof are these Worship one God Worship not the image of any creature mark he puts these for two several heads of the Decalogue and not the one as it were the tail of the other Swear not vainly by the name of God Observe the Festivals piously and righteously Honour your parents Kill no man Fly adultery Steal not Covet nothing that belongs to another Bear no false witness He is so far from dividing the Tenth Commandement that he puts the ninth after it whereby to keep others from dividing it for it is palpble himself took Nihil alienum concupiveris but for one Commandement And he saith so plainly That these were the heads of the Commandements that nothing could be said more plainly to shew That though the School did use a liberty in Disputing yet the Church did not use a liberty in Dogmatizing against the Ten Commandements as they had been taught and delivered by God himself 9. But that generally all good Church-men did even at that time in their method of Preaching of which he there speaketh part the first and second Commandements and did not part the tenth for he that saith Covet nothing that belongs to another sets down but one universal negative concerning all coveting And an universal negative may no more be divided into particulars then it may be limited for its division will at last prove its limitation and so an universal will be turned into a particular and Gods Negative will be made mans Affirmative as for example Thou shalt covet nothing of thy neighbours may be made Thou shalt covet something of thy neighbours for the enumeration of all the prohibited particulars in an universal negative being impossible to particularize in some few only as prohibited is in effect to leave those which are not particularized or enumerated out of the Prohibition and therefore we may not think those particulars which are set down in the Tenth Commandement to be set there by way of enumeration as if they were All but only by way of instance or exposition as being the most notorious And consequently one and the same Prohibition Thou shalt not covet must be extended to them All alike and then pass from those particulars till it come to this universal Nor any thing that is his So that this is in truth the Tenth Commandement Thou shalt not covet any thing that is thy neighbours for we cannot make it an universal Negative unless we suppose it but one universal Prohibition concerning all manner of concupiscence forbidding internally the first motions and affections thereof and the consent to either externally the leud significations or expressions and much more the completion and custom of concupiscence All these are alike forbidden in the Tenth Commandement by one the same universal Prohibition And if it be but one Prohibition it cannot be two Precepts and if it be two Precepts it cannot be one Prohibition so it must come from an universal negative forbidding all concupiscence to be a particular negative forbidding some concupiscence and consequently licencing that which it hath not forbidden 10. I have hitherto examined your assertion That all Catholick Divines after Saint Augustine did reckon the first and second Commandement but as one I now come to examine your Divinity built upon it and first that Position It is impossible for Christians whatever the Jews did well instructed in the First to offend through ignorance against the second Commandement You might as well have said It is impossible for Christians well instructed to sin through ignorance for you allow the instruction of the first to reach to the second or you allow no second Commandement so the instruction and the ignorance both concern the same thing I answer 1. God thought it not impossible for he hath given the second Commandement no less to Christians then to Jews since we find it not only re-inforced but also even repeated in the New Testament 1 John 5. 21. Little children keep your selves from Idols 9. d. If you will keep your selves Gods children and in his Communion you must
the whole But take heed whiles you say so that they who are against you and deny Purgatory tax you not of blasphemy for saying that which is not in being is a part of Christs Kingdom for to make Christ a King in Utopia in a place which is not is to make him no King And that they who are with you and affect purgatory tax you not of infidelity for believing that Christ hath taken possession of his whole Kingdom upon no better grounds then upon a meer uncertainty 6. For even your own Bellarmine though in his first Book de Purgatorio he writ so confidently as if all men were bound to believe Purgatory that will be saved yet in his second Book de circumstantiis Purgatorii He writes so ambiguously as to enfeeble any unprejudicate mans belief I will give you some few instances and then leave you to judge what small reason he had for his so great confidence Cap. 6. de loco Purgatorii He saith The Church hath not defined in what place Purgatory is for that the purgation of souls may be in many places and some are purged where they sinned but after several other opinions he seems to like that best which placeth Purgatory in the bowels of the earth because of several eruptions of fire out of the earth in several parts of the world Be it so if we must needs have a Purgatory that they may have the greatest share in it and terrour from it who were once the first inventers and now are the chiefest maintainers of it even the Italian Monks and Fryers for the most notorious eruptions of fire in these parts of the world are either in Italy as at Mount Vesuvius or not far from it as at Mount Aetna in Sicily Cap. 9. De tempore quo durat Purgatorium Of the time that Purgatory lasteth which is as uncertain as the place Quando ab hoc loco in coelum avolant res est incertissima How long the souls must stay in Purgatory before they can get to heaven is a matter of the greatest uncertainty Cap. 10. 11. Qualis sit purgatorii poena The quality of the Torment in Purgatory is as uncertain as either the time or place De poenâ Purgatorii quaedam sunt certa quaedam dubia As concerning the punishment of Purgatory some things are certain some are doubtfull Certa sunt Carentia visionis poena sensus poena ignis T is certain saith he the souls in Purgatory are under the punishment of loss for want of the beatifical vision and are under the punishment of sense by torment of fire Do they want the beatificall vision say then God hath thus sentenced them at their particular Judgement Depart from me ye cursed and let them hereafter be accounted not blessed but cursed souls not in a Communion with God but in a separation from him yet in saying so remember you bid your best Champion recall even the very subject of this whole Controversie which indeed is the best if not the only way to end it De Ecclesiâ quae est in Purgatorio of the Church which is in Purgatory for that cannot be a part of Gods Church which is in a separation from God And sure I am your Cardinal is beholding to the latter part of this same sentence to prove that souls in Purgatory are under the punishment of sense by fire for he proveth it by these words Ite in ignem aeternum Go into everlasting fire Mat. 25. And why not also prove their punishment of loss in the want of the beatifical vision from the first part of the same sentence Depart from me ye cursed For the same sentence denounceth the judgement of loss and of sense of loss in Depart from me ye cursed and of sense in Go into everlasting fire And we may fancy the one to be Temporarie as well as the other and to belong to righteous souls as much as the other but surely the Text saith both are eternal and belong only to the cursed And indeed t is a strange proof which brings Hell to prove Purgatory yet this is the best he can find in all the Scripture For here he proves that material fire can punish immaterial souls because it was provided to punish the Devil and his Angels which are immaterial spirits But still the proof concerneth only Hell fire so that in plain truth He alledgeth hell to prove Purgatory All the doubt is how he can make it so This proof is yet further enlarged in the next Chapter where he answers some chief doubts concerning Purgatory as whether it be a true real fire and how it can act upon separated souls and both are answered from these words Go ye cursed into everlasting fire Ignem Purgatorii esse corporeum quia in Scripturis passim poena impiorum vocatur Ignis Et regula Theologorum est ut verba Scripturarum accipiantur propriè quando nihil absurdi sequitur The fire of Purgatory is corporeal for commonly in the Scripture the punishment of the wicked is called fire what is the punishment of the wicked to the righteous or must men turn wicked that they may go to Purgatory and it is a rule of Divines That the words of Scripture are to be taken properly if there follow no absurdity and a little after Corpora damnatorum puniuntur igne Mat. 25. Ite in ignem aeternum est autem idem ignis corporum damnatorum spirituum corpore vacantium nam ibidem dicitur qui paratus est diabolo Angelis ejus The bodies of the damned are punished with fire Go into everlasting fire Mat. 25. but it is the same fire which punisheth their bodies and other souls or spirits without bodies as it is said Which is prepared for the Devil and his Angels Pray Sir why should any Christian be taught to desire to go to that fire which was prepared for the Devil and his Angels and if he do once go thither how shall he ever return from thence And yet your Cardinal would have us believe Purgatory that we may have the happiness to go thither and saith if we do not we shall burn for ever in Hell-fire A new Apostle sure he speaks not only so resolutely but likewise so authentically yet not dropt down as the rest from Mount Sion bùt from Mount Sina as we may guess by his Thunder and Lightning Seriously it is a sad thought for all good Christians that any Divine should after Nadab and Abihu dare offer strange fire for God is not well pleased with such an offering But it is a joyful thought for us poor Protestants that this fire of Purgatory is not only a strange but also a false fire for so we are sure it cannot burn us Else it seems after it hath been your Purgatory it should be our Hell However it is palpable That your Cardinals talk only is of Purgatory but his proof is of Hell Thus himself hath brought his certainties concerning
have not strained this Canon in my interpretations I assure you they are not mine but your own Authors The first is Gratians Par. 1. Dist. 28. c. 15. Si quis discernit Presbyterum conjugatum tanquam occasione â—…ptiarum quod offerre non debeat ab ejus oblatione ideo se abstinet Anathema sit The latter is the new Glossators upon Gratian in the edition authorized by Greg. 13. Si quis secernat se à Presbytero qui uxorem duxit tanquam non oporteat illo liturgiam peragente de oblatione percipere Anathema sit And he tells us That Dionysius exiguus had in effect so interpreted it before him 7. And this one single Canon might I alledge not only as the Jugement and Decree of the Catholick Church from the Code of her Canons but also as the Judgement of your own particular Roman Church from Dionysius and as the Decree of the same Church from Gratian But that both the antient Judgement and Decree of your Church are more clearly proved by the practice of it For in your very Church of Rome have heretofore been no less then nine Popes which were the sons of married Priests and Deacons whereas if Priests and Deacons marriage had been forbid by the Apostles or by the Catholick Church I might say They were the sins of Priests not sons and you might say They were very unfit Popes because very unfit successors for Saint Peter but more unfit Vicars for his master But so saith Gratian Par. 1. Dist. 56. cap. 2. Osius Papa fuit filius Stephani subdiaconi Bonifacius Papa fuit filius Jucundi Presbyteri Felix Papa filius Felicis Presbyteri de titulo Fasciolae Agapetus Papa filius Gordiani Presbyteri Theodorus Papa filius Theodori Episcopi de civitate Hierosolymâ Silverius Papa filius Silverii Episcopi Romae Deus dedit Papa filius Stephani subdiaconi Felix etiam tertius natione Romanus ex Patre Felice Presbytero fuit Item Gelasius natione Afer ex Episcopo Valerio natus est Item Agapetus natione Romanus ex Patre Gordiano Presbytero originem duxit complures etiam alii inveniuntur qui de sacerdotibus nati Apostolicae sedi praefuerunt See here are nine Popes named which were all the sons of married Clergy-men and yet Gratian concludes this Chapter saying These were not All divers more might be found if he had a mind to look after them yet these are enough to prove the practice of the Church of Rome for having married Priests till the year of our Lord 158 when Anastasius flourished who writ the lives of the Popes saith Bellarm. de script Eccles. with this emphatical asseveration Ut notum est denying Damasus cited by Gratian to have been the author of of that Book as well he might For Damasus lived in the year 367. So that very few of these men not above three at most had been Popes before his time for it is evident That Agapetus who is reckoned fourth in this Catalogue lived in the time of Justinian that is above 500. years after Christ For by his couragious answer he kept Justinian from embracing Eutychianism saying He thought he 〈◊〉 come to a Christian Emperour but he had found a Pagan persecutor the reason was The Emperour had laboured to perswade him to be an Eutychian And that Silverius who was this Agapetus his next successor may by the way be added to Gratians list for he was the son of Hormisdae not of Silverius Bishop of Rome I have no mind nor leisure to make any special enquiry after the rest and I need not For if you will consider this testimony seriously you will find in this one Catalogue not only Priests and Bishops of Rome to have been Fathers of Popes which is enough to prove the marriage of Priests allowed in that particular Church but also Theodorus Bishop of Hierusalem in Asia and Valerius Bishop of Hippo in Africa to have been Fathers of two of your antient Popes which is enough to prove the marriage of Priests then allowed in the Catholick Church that is to say not only in Europe but also in Asia and in Africa But I do intreate you to take special notice of Valerius Bishop of Hippo for he alone may very well make you misdoubt if not the truth yet the authority of your own alledged Canon since it is incredible that such a married Bishop should live at Hippo at the very same time in which such a Canon was made at Carthage against Priests marriages and neither confute the Canon having such a Learned Priest under him as Saint Augustine nor be confuted by it having so many enemies about him as the Donatists but however in that so many Fathers of your own Church have been the sons of married Priests it will be discretion in some of your Zealots hereafter to bestow better language upon the children of married Priests for fear they be constrained to reproach not only many of their own Popes but even the whole Church of Christ For so far doth your own Gratian justifie this Truth as to assure us That the marriage of Priests was lawful at that time in every Countrey over all the Christian world Dist. 56. c. 13. Quum ergo ex sacerdotibus natiin summos Pontifices supra leguntur esse promoti non sunt intelligendi de fornicatione sed de legitimis conjugiis nati quae sacerdotibus ante Prohibitionem Ubique licita erant in orientali Ecclesia usque hodie eis licere probatur When as therefore the sons of Priests as we we read before viz. cap. 2. which I alledged have been promoted to be Popes we may not think they were born to those Priests in fornication but in lawfull marriage for it was lawfull everywhere that is in all the Christian world for Priests to marry before the Prohibition and in the Eastern Church it is at this day proved to be lawfull So we see that the Clergy both of Eastern and Western Church did plainly shew by their Practice That the marriage of Priests was not prohibited by the Apostles or the Catholick Church and therefore generally used their liberty till some after-prohibition denyed the same to the Clergy of the Western Church And the new Glossator himself who confidently saith that Gratian was mistaken as to the Latine Church sheweth little reason for his own confidence because no pretence or proof for the others mistake till this Decree of Siricius which was not made till almost 400. and not generally ratified or received in his own Diocess till above a 1000. years after Christ For so Baronius himself hath recorded that in the year 1074. this Decree of prohibiting Priests marriage was forced upon the Bishops of Italy Germany and France by Pope Gregory the seventh after they had unanimously gainsayed and most earnestly deprecated and opposed it v. Bar. An. 1074. nu 37 38 39. Now if this Decree were not generally received in the Latine Church till then though it were made